Reducing Musculoskeletal Risk in Open Cut Coal MiningReducing Musculoskeletal Risk in Open Cut Coal Mining ACARP project C11058 Final Report August 31, 2004 Introduction Across all

ACARP Project C11058 Final Report

Reducing Musculoskeletal Risk in Open Cut Coal Mining

Project Leader: Dr Robin Burgess-LimerickInstitution: The University of Queensland

Other Investigators: Prof Jim Joy (MISHC, The University of Queensland)

AProf Leon Straker (Curtin University of Technology)

Industry Monitor: Heather Budd, Coal & Allied.

ACARP Project C11058 Final ReportReducing Musculoskeletal Risk in Open Cut Coal Mining

Project Leader: Dr Robin Burgess-LimerickInstitution: The University of QueenslandOther Investigators: Prof Jim Joy (MISHC, The University of Queensland)

AProf Leon Straker (Curtin University of Technology)Industry Monitor: Heather Budd, Coal & Allied.

August 31, 2004


ACARP project C11058 Final Report August 31, 2004

Introduction Across all industries, approximately 40% of injuries aremusculoskeletal injuries associated with manual tasks (NOHSC,1998). The majority of these injuries are believed to bepreventable without any loss of productivity (OSHA, 1999). Theprevalence may be even higher in coal mining, wheremusculoskeletal injuries (sprains and strains of joints and adjacentmuscles) represented 67% of compensation claims in coal mininginvolving five or more lost days (1994-1999, National Workers’Compensation Database – http://nohsc.info.au.com/).

It is widely accepted that implementation of a comprehensiveergonomics program is likely to be the most effective means ofreducing exposure to musculoskeletal injury risks associated withmanual tasks within individual workplaces. The core elements of asuccessful ergonomics program include management commitment,employee involvement, hazard identification, risk control, andemployee training and education (US Government AccountingOffice, 1997).

A participatory approach to manual task risk reduction takes as aframework a risk management cycle of hazard identification, riskassessment, risk control and follow up evaluation. A hierarchy ofrisk control strategies is also assumed, with design changes toremove or reduce hazards preferred, and 'administrative’ controlssuch as task rotation or skills training suggested only when'engineering’ controls cannot be developed. Where theparticipative approach differs from other “external expert”approaches, is the assertion that workers performing the manualtasks are the ‘experts’ and that, given sufficient training andmotivation, work teams are in the best position to undertakehazard identification, risk assessment and risk control activities.

The participatory approach requires work teams to beknowledgeable about the risk management framework and havesome basic ergonomics skills. Training workers to acquire theseskills and work within a risk management framework is the focus ofthis approach. The approach also requires work teams consisting ofa supervisor and the small group of (5-10) workers to workeffectively together. The work team is instructed in riskmanagement and how to identify basic risk factors for injuries dueto manual tasks. Team members identify hazards in their work andare facilitated through a risk assessment process which requiresthem to develop control suggestions. The work teams plan theimplementation of key controls and are subsequently shown howto evaluate those controls. Management commitment and effectiverisk management systems are required for the approach to bemaximally effective, and access to external ergonomics expertassistance may be required for particularly difficult or complexproblems.



problems.

Benefits of the participative approach include:• expertise of workers is used to identify problems and solutions

resulting in a better quality of risk assessment and control• workers develop ownership of the process and are

consequently more likely to support rather than obstructsuggested changes to work practises

• improved team work and team cooperation• positive impact on general safety climate and culture

Some work has previously been undertaken to producedocuments outlining the application of ergonomics in coal mines(Andrew & Simpson, 1993; McPhee, 1993), and mining moregenerally (Gallagher, 1998), however as Culvenor et al (2000)noted in their review of occupational health and safety priorities forthe Australian coal industry, there is a lack of research in the areaof manual tasks injury prevention, both nationally andinternationally.

In mining, as in industry more generally, the focus of preventingmanual tasks injuries must be on reducing overall manual tasks riskfactors. What is needed, as Simpson (2000) puts it, is “a detailedand systematic risk assessment system” and “a little more creativityand imagination when developing risk control measures” (p. 262).The aim of this project is to provide the necessary risk assessmentsystem, and harness the creativity and imagination of workersthrough the participative ergonomics process.

Objectives The objectives of the project were:

(i) to identify and assess common high risk manual tasks involvedin open cut coal mining;(ii) to develop, implement, and evaluate control measures forthese tasks; and(iii) to determine whether controls are transferable to otherworkplaces.

The initial phase of the project was to identify common high riskmanual tasks at a sample of typical open cut coal mines and toprovide training in manual tasks risk assessment and managementto intact work teams at each site. The premise of this training isthat workers are in the best position to both identify injury risks,and to suggest effective control measures. As well as skills transfer,the outcome of the training was a range of potential controlmeasures suggested by each work team. The next phase of theproject was to trial selected controls.



A draft handbook “Reducing Musculoskeletal Risk in Open CutCoal Mining” and accompanying video were prepared anddisseminated throughout the industry for comment. Feedback onthe materials was obtained through interview and the primaryoutcomes of the project are the final versions of this handbook,video, and accompanying document collating examples of manualtask controls.

ProjectSummary

Six sites have been involved in the project. Tarong was involvedas a participating site in a previous feasibility study, and theinformation gathered through that participation has been utilisedin the current project. Ulan and Gregory were involved throughthe participation of staff in manual tasks risk assessment trainingand control training. Warkworth, Mt. Thorley and Hunter ValleyOperations were involved through the training of CHPP, mining& maintenance workers. Employees of three contractors(Convatech, Johnson Screens & MBM Sheet Metal) have alsobeen involved in the training at these sites. Staff at a number ofother sites have indirectly involved in the project, includingthrough provision of comment on the draft handbook and video.

ACARP funding commenced February 25, 2002. Between thenand August 2002, three visits to Ulan and two visits to Gregorywere undertaken, as well as follow up visit to Tarong (elevendays total on site – Appendix A, Table 1). Presentations werealso made at Townsville and Terrigal mining safety conferences(4-7/8/02 & 1-3/9/02).

Between September 2002 and March 2003, nine visits toWarkworth, Mount Thorley and Hunter Valley Operations havebeen undertaken (20 days total on site – Appendix A, Table 2).An additional visit to Bengalla was undertaken at the same timeto inspect the wash plant facilities there. Briefing, training andfeedback sessions were undertaken with coal handling andpreparation plant crews, mining and maintenance crews andcontractors at three sites as scheduled. A total of 55 employeeswere involved in these training sessions.

Between April 2003 and September 2003, an additional threevisits over six days were undertaken to four sites (Appendix A,Table 3). High risk manual tasks and existing controls wereidentified and documented throughout the briefing and trainingsessions conducted at these sites, and potential new controlsidentified during the feedback sessions. This information formedthe basis of the draft handbook “Reducing Musculoskeletal Riskin Open Cut Coal Mining” and accompanying video.

Two workshops were held in Sydney on August 26, 2003 as partof the NSW mining safety conference. These workshops wereattended by 30 conference delegates. A workshop was also held inEmerald on September 19, 2003. This workshop was attended by12 participants from the surrounding sites. These workshops werevery successful in raising awareness of the project.



of the NSW mining safety conference. These workshops wereattended by 30 conference delegates. A workshop was also held inEmerald on September 19, 2003. This workshop was attended by12 participants from the surrounding sites. These workshops werevery successful in raising awareness of the project.

The draft handbook and video were disseminated to workshopparticipants and other industry personnel who expressed interest.Further follow up visits to Ulan and Hunter valley Operations wereundertaken (October 2003), and a supplementary electronicdocument providing details of additional controls was beencompleted and released (November 2003).

Telephone interviews were then undertaken with recipients of thedraft handbook and video (February-April 2004), with very positiveresponse overall. This is consistent across mine employees(operators, superintendents, safety advisors) and also externalconsultants/advisors. Most recipients were enthusiastic about thehandbook and video, and stated that potential exists to use thetools in training. Many reported that they did intend to use tool intraining at some time. Some have discussed tools with other safetyadvisors and at safety meetings. External consultants (eg.,therapists) were the group which were most appreciative of tool,and a number have requested permission to use the materials atsurface mines.

The final versions of the handbook, video, and supplementarycontrols document were revised in light of the feedback providedthrough this process and form the primary outcome of the project.The handbook, video and supplementary documents are providedas appendices B to D of this report. These documents have beenpromoted and disseminated at the NSW and Queensland miningsafety conferences in 2004, and a paper was presented at theNSW conference on July 27, 2004.

Conclusions The project has demonstrated the feasibility of implementationof a participative program for manual tasks at open cut coal sites.With appropriate training, mine workers are able to undertakerisk assessment of manual tasks, and generate appropriatecontrol suggestions. The handbook and video produced as partof the project provide the training materials necessary for sitesto implement such a program.



References Andrew, M. & Simpson, G. (1993). A guide for the application of ergonomics incoal mines. Joint Coal Board Health & Safety Trust.

Culvenor, J., Knowles, J, & Cowley, S. (2000). Occupational Health and SafetyPriorities for the Australian Coal Industry. Report to the Australian CoalResearch Association Program (ACARP).

Gallagher, S. (1998). Ergonomics issues in mining. In Karwowski, W., & Marras,W.S. (Eds.). The Occupational Ergonomics Handbook. CRC Press. (p.1893-1915).

US Government Accounting Office (1997). Worker protection – Private sectorergonomics programs yield positive reports. GAO/HEHS-97-163.

McPhee, B. (1993). Ergonomics for the control of strains and sprains in mining.National Occupational Health & Safety Commission.

NIOSH (2000). A compendium of NISH mining research 2001. US Dept of Health& Human Services.

NOHSC (1998). Compendium of workers’ compensation statistics, Australia,1996-97. NOHSC.

OSHA (1999). Preliminary economic analysis for OSHA’s proposed ergonomicsprogram standard. http://www.osha-slc.gov/ergonomics-standard/tables/Table.html

Simpson, G.C. (2000). Reducing manual handling injury: The holy grail of healthand safety. (pp. 259-267). Minesafe International 2000. Perth.



Appendix A: site visit details

Table 1: summary of site visits 3/02 – 7/02

Month Tarong Ulan Gregory

3/02 Visit 1(21-22/3)

4/02 Follow upvisit (5/4)

5/02 Visit 2(2-3/5)

Visit 2(7-8/5)

Visit 3(28/5-29/5)

6/02 Visit 3(3/6-4/6)


Month Warkworth Mt Thorley Hunter ValleyOperations

11/027 management

briefingmanagementbriefing

12/021112

17

briefing CHPP,mining &maintenance

training mining& maintenance

1/03212223

24

282930

feedbackmaintenancebriefing CHPP& contractors

briefing CHPP& contractors

managementbriefing and videofootagebriefing CHPP &maintenancebriefing inSingleton

video footage

2/034

5

26

2728

training CHPP

Training CHPP& contractors

briefing CHPP

video footage

briefing CHPPbriefing andtraining mining

3/0311 feedback

contractorsfeedback mining



12

27/3

28/3

contractors

CHPP feedback

briefing andtrainingmaintenance

CHPP &Contractors –training


Date Warkworth Mt Thorley HunterValleyOperations

Gregory

3/4 Maintenance –feedback

13/5 C H P P -feedback

Review

14/5 C H P P –feedback

15/5 Review Controlfootage

16/5 Contractors –feedback

15/7 Follow up



Appendix B: Final Handbook


Burgess-Limerick, R., Leveritt, S., Nicholson, M. & Straker, L. (2004). ReducingMusculoskeletal Risk in Open Cut Coal Mining. The University of Queensland.

Reducing MusculoskeletalRisk in Open Cut Coal Mining

ACARPAu s t r a l i a n C o a l A s s o c i a t i o n R e s e a r c h P r o g r a m

Reducing MusculoskeletalRisk in Open

Cut Coal Mining

ACARPAu s t r a l i a n C o a l A s s o c i a t i o n R e s e a r c h P r o g r a m

Main Front Cover Photo

A Universal Dig and Dump dragline at BMA’s Peak Downs Mine (courtesy UDDTek and CRCMining)

PUBLICATION INFORMATION

Burgess-Limerick, R., Leveritt, S., Nicholson, M. and Straker, L. (2004).Reducing Musculoskeletal Risk in Open Cut Coal Mining. The University of Queensland.

Additional information available at:http://ergonomics.uq.edu.au/download/surfacecontrols.pdf

© 2003–2004 The University of Queensland

DEDICATED TO

Karen Patricia O’Rourke 12th June 1972 – 16th April 2004

TABLE OF CONTENTSINTRODUCTION 2

Acknowledgments 2Purpose and Objectives 3Background 5

SECTION 1 – MANUAL TASKS 61.1 Musculoskeletal Injuries 6

Assessment of Musculoskeletal Risk Factors 7Risk Factors 8Identification of the Risk Factors 12PErforM Tool 13Performing Risk Assessments of Manual Tasks 16

1.2 Manual Tasks Control Strategies 18The Importance of a Participative Approach 18Hierarchy of Controls 21

Design Controls 21Administrative Controls 23

General Control Options 25

1.3 Manual Tasks Case Studies 26Case Study 1 – Worked Example 26Case Study 2 30Case Study 3 31

SECTION 2 – SLIPS, TRIPS AND FALLS 322.1 Uneven and Cluttered Surface 332.2 Poor Design Characteristics of Access and Egress systems 35

2.3 Frictional Qualities 39

FURTHER READING 40

ATTACHMENT 41Sample PErforM Tool 42

AcknowledgmentsThis handbook and the accompanying video are outcomes of a project funded by the Australian CoalAssociation Research Program and undertaken by staff at the University of Queensland (School ofHuman Movement Studies, Minerals Industry Safety and Health Centre) and Curtin University ofTechnology (School of Physiotherapy).

This handbook and the accompanying video are the result of the participation of many differentpeople including frontline workers from wash plants, maintenance and mining sections; safetypersonnel and management from many different mine sites, as well as the consultants. As acollaborative group, these individuals have provided many years of mining industry and healthexperience, and their participation is very much appreciated. Special thanks to the following sites:

BMA – Gregory Crinum (Gregory Mine).Coal & Allied – Hunter Valley Operations; Mount Thorley Operations and Warkworth Mine Limited.Pacific Coals’Tarong Mine.Roche Mining – Ulan.

02

INTRODUCTION

Purpose and ObjectivesThe purpose of this document is to provide guidance on a risk based approach to thereduction of musculoskeletal risk in the open cut coal mining industry.

This handbook provides specific “how-to” information on the identification and control of both traditionalrisk factors for developing musculoskeletal injuries and the risk factors for slips, trips and fall incidents,which can also result in musculoskeletal injuries.

This handbook aims to provide the tools needed to implement programs targeting the reduction of musculoskeletal risk to workers.This will be done by promoting awareness of the human andfinancial costs of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) in open cut mining; outlining the use of an effectiverisk assessment tool; discussing control options; and illustrating the process by which controls might beimplemented. An accompanying video is provided for use in conjunction with the handbook in stafftraining and further examples of controls are provided in a supplementary electronic document(http://ergonomics.uq.edu.au/download/surfacecontrols.pdf). It is not the purpose of this handbook toprovide a catalogue of control options.Whilst some specific examples are presented as part of thecase studies and controls are discussed in general terms, for more information on specific controloptions please download the previously mentioned electronic document.

Users of this handbook should be able to realise the following objectives:

! An understanding of the risk factors for musculoskeletal injuries.! The ability to perform risk assessments of problem open cut mining tasks and identify the risk

factors for musculoskeletal injuries.! An understanding of the relative merits of different control strategies – in particular design

and administrative controls.! The ability to participate in the management of such risk factors to reduce musculoskeletal

risk; by playing a role in the development and successful implementation of effective controls.

03

More specifically:

Management may use the handbook to further understand the benefits and importance of aparticipative approach incorporating representatives from across the workforce, when developing,designing, purchasing and implementing controls. (See Section 1.2 Manual Tasks Control Strategies).

Safety Advisors, OHS representatives and those charged with addressing onsite health andsafety issues will be able to use this handbook in a number of ways.The Participative Ergonomicsfor Manual Tasks (PErforM) risk assessment tool can be used to systematically assess problemmanual tasks, followed by the application of the information on control development andimplementation in Section 1.2.

Further, the handbook, and accompanying video* may also be useful for training onsite employeesand contractors in identifying the risk factors for developing musculoskeletal injuries. Promoting aparticipative approach from the initial stages of risk assessment right through to the developmentand implementation of controls will lay a good foundation for the successful implementation ofdeveloped controls.There is a supplementary controls document located athttp://ergonomics.uq.edu.au/download/surfacecontrols.pdf which provides examples of somecontrol options implemented by other sites for the more common problem manual tasks.

Operators from across all areas will benefit by the practical application of the PErforM riskassessment tool and having knowledge of the risk factors for musculoskeletal injuries.The ability to identify risk factors within the operators own job demands and assist in the development ofcontrols will allow the operator to play an essential role in reducing their personal risk of injury.

04

* For a copy of video contact Robin Burgess-Limerick ([email protected]).

BackgroundThis handbook is one of the outcomes of a research project – “Reducing musculoskeletal risk in opencut coal mining”.The project utilised a participative problem solving approach for addressing manualtasks risks, known as the PErforM program.

Work teams from various areas within open cut coal mining (CHPP, maintenance and mining) atTarong, Ulan and Gregory sites in Queensland, and the Hunter Valley Region in New South Waleswere selected and common hazardous manual tasks were identified and discussed.This was done with two major objectives in mind:

1) The education and training of workers in the methods and process of performing a manual tasksrisk assessment, and

2) The development of effective controls for hazardous manual tasks.

Work teams comprised of both mine operator employees and contractor employees.These groupswere trained in the use of the PErforM risk assessment tool.They were then asked to assess tasksthey performed using the PErforM tool to identify risk factors for musculoskeletal injuries and establishpriority and risk ratings. Facilitated group discussions followed, to identify a number of high risk manualtasks, and these were targeted for control development. Reports outlining the workers’ feedback andcontrol recommendations were subsequently provided to the relevant company. Several sites followedthrough by implementing some of the recommendations. Examples are presented in this handbook ascase studies (see Section 1.3). The case studies show the practical application of the PErforM riskassessment tool and demonstrate the participative approach towards the development and successfulimplementation of effective control options.

One aim of the project is to disseminate the results of the process through this handbook, and tofollow up recipients to determine whether this information is useful to other sites.

05

1.1 Musculoskeletal InjuriesMusculoskeletal injuries have considerable financial impact on the open cut coal mining industry –resulting in an average 378 injuries per year in Australia [National Occupational Health and SafetyCommission (NOHSC) National Workers’ Compensation Statistics Database 1995–2000].On a more personal level, musculoskeletal injuries can have a huge impact on the quality of life for the injured person. Injuries may occur to a number of tissues including ligaments, tendons, muscles,nerves and intervertebral discs. Back pain is the most common consequence, however injuries to the neck, shoulder, upper limbs and lower limbs may also occur. Depending on their severity,musculoskeletal injuries may result in any of the following:

" permanent loss of function," chronic back pain," loss of the ability to perform tasks requiring a certain level of skill and manual dexterity such as

manipulating tools, driving vehicles and even simply walking.

Research into the causes of musculoskeletal injuries has identified several specific risk factors that playa significant role in the development and onset of musculoskeletal injuries.These risk factors have alsobeen recognised as significant contributing/causal factors by OHS authorities worldwide. By preventingor minimising exposure to these risk factors, the open cut coal mining industry can reduce the risk ofits workers developing musculoskeletal injuries.

Reduction of the severity of risk factors overall, even when one specific risk factor may not beeliminated completely, will contribute to the reduction of the overall level of risk. Minimising exposureacross the workers shift will have an impact on their total exposure to risk factors across all tasks.

06

SECTION 1 – MANUAL TASKS

Assessment of Musculoskeletal Risk FactorsThere are a number of issues that are important to consider when identifying problem manual tasksand assessing musculoskeletal risk factors.

Unlike safety issues, the risk factors for musculoskeletal injuries are often not obvious to the assessor.For example, a missing guard or handrail is clearly seen during a safety inspection, however performinga task that places the musculoskeletal system at risk of injury due to the presence of a number of riskfactors is not so obvious.To identify a problem manual task, the assessor must be able to identify theexistence of specific risk factors.These risk factors may not be apparent unless the worker is presentand observed performing the actual task, and the assessor must observe the worker at work toobserve the interaction with the environment and tools.

Another issue for consideration is that the same task and same environment may affect differentworkers in different ways. For example a smaller worker may be required to over reach – while ataller worker may be cramped and restricted.

The assessment tool used in the PErforM project is useful in assisting the assessor to overcome thesedifficulties.The tool provides systematic guidance for identifying known manual tasks risk factors andassessing the degree of exposure to each risk factor.

An important factor to consider is the cumulative nature of many musculoskeletal injuries.This meansthat often musculoskeletal injuries are the result of many hours exposure to a risk factor.While theonset of a musculoskeletal injury as the result of a single one-off exposure to a risk factor can occur,this is quite rare. In most cases, initial damage will begin occurring at the micro-level. After sufficientexposure, the musculoskeletal system (such as soft tissue like muscle) can be damaged (micro-tear).Insufficient recovery time and further exposure means the body is unable to repair any micro-tears,and as a result cumulative damage occurs. Changes can occur within the soft tissue such asinflammation, reduced blood flow and the build-up of scar tissue.These conditions will eventuallyresult in the individual experiencing painful symptoms and reduced functional capacity.

It is important to note that at the early stages of injury the worker will likely not have any symptomsof pain or reduced function. By the time the damage is severe enough to impact on the worker in thisway, the damage is often quite serious, potentially irreversible, and certainly past the point of allowingthe worker to continue working in the same capacity.

It can be a challenge for the assessor to commit to identifying a particular task as hazardous based ontheir risk assessment results, when experienced workers state that they are not suffering anysymptoms. However, much research has shown the significant link between exposure to specific riskfactors and the onset of musculoskeletal injury.This is an area in which education and training topromote awareness of both risk factors and nature of musculoskeletal injuries may help gain workersupport.

What are the risk factors for developing MSDs?

07

Risk FactorsThere are four risk factors for musculoskeletal injury:

1) Forceful exertions2) Awkward postures3) Vibration4) Repetition and duration

1. Forceful Exertions

Forceful exertions subject the body including muscles, tendons, ligaments and other connective tissue tohigh forces; potentially leading to fatigue of the tissue and subsequent injury. Forceful exertions includeforces exerted by muscles such as when lifting items, carrying loads, holding a static posture or requiringa forceful grip such as when turning on a tight tap. Exposure to forces also occurs as a result ofexternal forces such as the weight of a load being handled or jumping (from one level to another – outof vehicles to ground level). In such cases these forces may act on the musculoskeletal system, includingthe discs within the spine and also on the connective tissues at the knees, shoulders and wrists. Notethat it is the magnitude of the force relative to the capability of the tissue which is important, not theabsolute magnitude of the force. Small tissues may be injured by relatively low forces.

08

FORCEFUL EXERTIONS

2.Awkward (and Sustained) Postures

The risk factor “awkward postures” refers to any working postures where the body parts are not in aneutral (or comfortable) position resulting in stretching of connective tissues.This risk factor alsoincludes other less extreme working postures where a posture is required to be sustained for aprolonged time period. For example, standing for a lengthy period of time may be considered as anawkward (sustained) posture.

The problem with sustained postures is that there is little or no movement: the body requires musclemovement to assist with moving the blood supply around the body. Sustained postures can lead toblood pooling and a lack of blood supply in other areas. As a result, muscles or soft tissue sufferfatigue quickly which increases the risk of injury. An example of a more extreme awkward posturewould be working with a hand held tool, with the arms held overhead for a period of time; such aposture would require excessive muscular force to achieve the posture and further force to sustainthe posture. Muscles and soft tissue required to adopt such postures can become fatigued quickly andthen be prone to developing injuries.

09

AWKWARD AND SUSTAINED POSTURES

3.Vibration

Coal mine workers may be exposed to vibration through many different sources including all types ofmachinery or equipment with moving parts.Vehicles, entire wash plants and hand tools are all sourcesof vibration.

Vibration is broken into two main types:

(i) Whole body vibration Exposure to whole body vibration occurs when the whole body of workersare in contact with a vibrating surface such as a seat, or floor, of heavyvehicles and machinery.This also may occur in the floor of the control roomin wash plants.

(ii) Hand/arm vibrationExposure to hand/arm vibration occurs when workers are holding vibratinghand tools such as air operated tools, pneumatic and electric, and petrol-powered tools.

When the body or limbs are exposed to vibration, the force of this movement is absorbed by thebody and musculoskeletal system. After significant exposure changes in the soft tissues may occur.Exposure to hand/arm vibration may eventually result in several types of injuries, primarily damage tovascular and neural tissue; this is typically seen in the fingers, and is known as Vibration White Finger –or Raynaud’s Syndrome.Whole Body Vibration exposure has also been shown to be a strongcontributor to low back injuries.

Occasional exposure to vibration will likely allow sufficient time for the soft tissue to recover betweenepisodes of exposure. However, long duration or frequent vibration exposure will significantly increasethe risk of developing musculoskeletal injuries. One study showed that workers using grinders on adaily basis experienced the first stages of Vibration White Finger after two years of exposure.

10

4. Repetition and Duration

Exposure to repetition occurs when similar movements are required to be performed for one houror longer. Repetitive work also refers to work where, although the task itself may change, the workerperforms similar actions across a number of tasks during their shift. As a result, the same muscles andother soft tissue are being used continuously, contributing to their fatigue and risk of injury. Examplesinclude tasks such as shovelling and hand tool use.

Duration is a simple risk factor which encourages the assessor to consider how long a worker might be performing the task. Duration may be considered as a significant risk factor when a task is performedfor one hour or longer.

11

TASKS INVOLVING REPETITION & DURATION

Identification of The Risk FactorsAs with the identification of safety risk factors, identifying risk factors within manual tasks involvesperforming a risk assessment.There is a major difference between safety based hazards and hazardousmanual tasks that requires consideration when assessing manual tasks: musculoskeletal injuries areoften the result of repeated exposure – rarely does a musculoskeletal injury occur as the result of aone-off exposure to a risk factor.Thus it may be more difficult to identify a hazardous manual task –particularly when workers are not experiencing any current pain or symptoms.The lack of symptomscan be deceptive: as discussed earlier, damage to the musculoskeletal system is being done on amicro-level, before pain is felt. Once pain is felt, it is often too late, and the injury may be at a non-reversible point.

In most cases, the tasks need to be observed as workers are performing them.To develop effectivecontrols it is extremely important to correctly identify all risk factors that may be impacting on theworkers. For example, a task where vibration is considered to be the risk factor may be addressed byapplying lagging to the hand tool – however, if other risk factors are present such as awkward posturesand high trigger force, the worker is still at risk of injury until these risk factors are controlled.

We have discussed four major individual risk factors. It is important to note that many tasks exposeworkers to a combination of risk factors. In such cases, it is important to be able to identify all presentrisk factors, and then prioritise them for developing control options.

Which risk factors are present in the following scenario?

12

Table of Comments on previous scenario:

RISK FACTOR TASK OBSERVATIONS

Forceful exertions Worker holding the tool is clearly using relatively high muscle force toperform the task.

Awkward Postures Both workers are working above shoulder height.

Vibration The tool is a source of hand arm vibration.

Repetition The variety of actions in this task are limited, and likely the worker will berepeating this task a number of times during his shift.

Duration The duration of performing this task can be in excess of 30 minutes. Evenwhen duration is under one hour, considering the extreme forcefulexertions required and the presence of the other risk factors it isworthwhile to consider the duration of this task as an important riskfactor.

Which workers to assess?

All groups of potential users of a system or piece of equipment need to be involved in the process ofthe risk assessment; this must follow through to the development and implementation of controls.Toooften a particular group is left out, placing them at risk of injury. For example, the operators of a pieceof mobile plant may be assessed when looking at the risk factors involved in accessing the vehicle,however maintenance workers must also be included in this assessment to ensure that anymodifications do not restrict the access to the engine and any other areas requiring maintenance.

PErforM ToolThe following pages show the risk assessment tool used in PErforM.This tool provides a systematicprocess for performing a manual tasks risk assessment.The task is assessed for the specific risk factorsimpacting on the worker. Importantly, the assessment also considers the workplace environment, toolsand any equipment that may be used.

These pages may be copied and enlarged for internal use by coal mining companies. Use by anotherperson or organisations requires written permission. Please contact Robin Burgess-Limerick([email protected])

13

PErforMParticipative Ergonomics for Manual Tasks

MANUAL TASKS RISK ASSESSMENT FORM

DATE & WORKPLACE

Date: Workplace:

RISK ASSESSORS

Work Unit / Team:Positions:Names:

TASK DESCRIPTION

Name of task:

Why was this task selected?

Location where task occurs:

Who performs the task:

General description:

Postures:

Forceful/muscular exertions:

Repetition and duration:

Tools or equipment used:

Work/task organization and environment:

14

© The University of Queensland

RISK ASSESSMENT1. Indicate on the body chart which area of the body you feel is affected by the task.2. If more than one body part is affected you may shade the different body parts in different

colours. If so, use the matching colour when scoring the risk factors e.g. red for arms on thebody and score sheet, blue for low back on the body and score sheet.

3. Give each risk factor a score out of five. One (1) is when the risk factor is not present and five(5) is when exposure to the risk factor is the most severe possible.

EXERTION BODY PART

AWKWARD POSTURE

VIBRATION

DURATION

REPETITION

RISK CONTROLSDESIGN CONTROL OPTIONS:(Eliminate, Substitute, Engineer)

ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OPTIONS:

15

1No effort

2 3Moderateforce & speed

4 5Maximumforce or speed

1All posturesneutral

2 3 Moderatelyuncomfortable

4 5 Veryuncomfortable

1

None

2 3

Moderate

4 5

Extreme

1 < 10 minutes

2

10–30 min

3

30 min – 1 hr

4

1–2 hrs

5

> 2 hrs

1 No repetition

2 3 cycle time < 30 s



Performing Risk Assessments of Manual TasksWorkers in this industry are highly experienced and skilled when it comes to performing safety riskassessments. Risk assessments are integrated into safety and work systems. Each individual has theability to identify hazards, assess consequential risk and determine appropriate work methods andcontrols. Assessments such as the job hazard analysis (JHA) are often done routinely prior to theonset of a maintenance job or change out procedure. However, one of the findings of this project hasbeen that systematic risk assessments such as the JHA may either overlook manual tasks aspects ofthe task, or do not consider all manual tasks risk factors. As a consequence risk factors that contributeto musculoskeletal injuries are not adequately controlled.This is a significant omission, resulting in thesituation where manual tasks risk factors are not identified in a timely manner i.e. pre-task, when somebenefit would be gained from implementing a control strategy. Rather, identification of risky manualtasks tends to be done in an ad hoc manner – post injury or after the development of symptoms.

While the PErforM tool is suitable for such assessments, it may be sufficient to simply use the secondpage as part of JHAs.

How to use the Risk Assessment Tool

The risk assessment tool is a straightforward, self-explanatory two-page form. Completing these formsfor problem manual tasks and storing them provides a record of the risk assessment.The informationmay be useful for future reference and comparisons.

Page oneThe first page of the risk assessment tool is useful for thinking about the task and breaking it downto identify any significant risk factors. It is also useful for recording brief notes on particular aspectsof the task.

Under the heading “task description”, the question is asked as to why the task was selected.A particular task may be selected for risk assessment for a number of reasons:

" after reports of an injury or symptoms of pain from workers;" the implementation of a new task is being considered;" if any changes are being made to work methods, tools or equipment; or " when observations of the task indicate there may be the presence of a risk factor

for musculoskeletal injury.

16

Page twoThe second page is the major part of the risk assessment.The body map prompts the user to thinkabout any areas of the body that may be affected.

The analysis section also asks the user to determine a ranking for the level of severity of each riskfactor for each affected body region.This does not need to be difficult.The user should think aboutwork activities in general.Then determine a ranking for this task as a comparative basis across alltasks. For example, consider “is this task requiring maximum force?” If the worker is able tocontinue working at the same level after the task – probably not. However if the worker is leftexhausted and has significantly reduced capacity to exert any forces afterwards, then quite likely thisis the maximum force.

When looking at posture, the ranking of five (5) is for very uncomfortable.The user might considerwhether there are any even more extreme postures that could be more uncomfortable.

The selected rankings should be circled to provide a clear profile of the task, highlighting the mostsignificant risk factors needing attention.

The accompanying video provides further guidance in the use of the tool. To obtain a copy, contactRobin Burgess-Limerick ([email protected]).

The results of the risk assessment provide information to both assist with the prioritisation of tasks forcontrol, and to provide guidance regarding the areas of the task to which attentions should be paid.

The final section calls for control options.The control sections of this handbook will provide guidanceon selecting control strategies for the open cut mining industry.

17

1.2 Manual Tasks Control StrategiesThe importance of a Participative approachThe reduction of musculoskeletal risk requires the successful implementation of effective controlswhich do not introduce new risk factors into the workplace.There are three elements requiringconsideration when planning a control strategy:

1) effective controls,2) successful implementation and 3) managing potential new risk factors.

Encouraging work teams to participate during the complete control strategy process is an effectiveway to ensure these elements are adequately considered.Worker participation is critical to the overallsuccess of the control strategy.

18

1. Effective controls

There is considerable cost (both human and financial) involved in implementing a control strategy.To justify this cost the controls need to be effective. Effective controls will target the actual risk factors present in the task.This is why performing a thorough risk assessment which identifies all the important risk factors as they impact on the relevant workers is essential.

Within the open cut coal mining industry there are often numerous workers involved with one task. Also there are many users of an item of plant or equipment. Each individual user will likely have different abilities, levels of skill, techniques and subsequently may interact differently with theequipment. Different groups of people who interact with the same piece of plant, for exampleoperators and maintenance workers will have different requirements. A control that is going to beeffective will need to meet the needs of all.To achieve this, it is important to consider and apply theinput of all users.

2. Successful implementation

A number of people (including frontline management and operational personnel) will play a role inthe implementation of a control strategy. All persons who are likely to have some responsibility at the implementation stages need to be involved from the very beginning.This in particular applies tooperators and maintainers.They are the “hands on” deliverers of a control strategy. Involving workersright from the beginning and giving genuine consideration to their input and ideas will give workers a sense of ownership over the proposed controls.

Worker commitment can be further achieved by:

" Providing clear and specific training associated with the control strategy such as any new workmethods, safe and appropriate use of tools and equipment, and implementation timeframes.

" Communication from management on organisational expectations." Feedback to the work team discussing the basis of the changes such as the justification behind

decisions." Recognition of worker commitment to the control strategy.

Successful implementation requires the commitment of people at all levels, including management.Enforcement and recognition from management are important in demonstrating organisationalcommitment and encouraging workers.

The organisational climate at the time of implementation must be considered. Factors such asorganisational activities, workload demand, resources (human and financial) and workforce presence(for example the absence of key players) can all impact on the success of implementation.

19

3. No new risk factors

To reduce the likelihood of introducing new risk factors when implementing controls, consider thefollowing points:

! Ensure all relevant workforce are represented during control design and development stage:An observation of this research project has been that sometimes a section of the workforcemay be left out of the process during the design stage. This group may suffer subsequently whenchanges have been made without considering their activities.

The team of people selected to participate should be such that all system users are representedand all aspects of the task/equipment/tool/system will be considered in terms of the controlstrategy. It is also important to involve experienced workers who have the ability to providecritical feedback based on their experience.

! Ongoing reviews:Timely post implementation reviews and ongoing participative monitoring as part of the overallrisk assessment strategy are important methods to pick up any newly introduced risk factors.

20

Hierarchy of ControlsTraditionally, control options are evaluated according to the hierarchy of controls; this hierarchy alsoapplies to controls for hazardous manual tasks. In manual tasks, controls may be divided into designcontrols and administrative controls.

DESIGN CONTROLS

Design refers to a control strategy that involves redesigning the task, workplace or tools to eliminateor reduce the risk. Design controls include elimination, substitution and engineering controls. Somegeneral examples of design controls are discussed below.

Elimination! Eliminate the problem task completely, for example automate a complete job process or

aspects of a particular task.

Substitution! Replace heavy items for lighter objects, smaller objects and/or objects with better improved

handling characteristics (such as handles, less awkward size and shape).This may involvemaking arrangements with suppliers, packaging departments or delivery providers.

! Upgrade to better quality tools with improved efficiency to reduce force required to perform task.

! Select power tools that have less vibration, replace vehicle seats with anti-vibration seats.

Engineering! Redesign the workplace layout, for example provide:

" more workspace to reduce awkward postures," adjustable benches or seating.

! Introduce mechanical lifting aids to eliminate manual handling.! Implement the use of damping materials around tool handles to absorb vibration and reduce

impact on workers. Damping materials can also be used in floors and around vibratingmachinery to reduce worker exposure to whole body vibration.

21

22

1. EFFECTIVE CONTROLS" Target risk factors" Consult all users " Consider all task demands 2. SUCCESSFUL

IMPLEMENTATION" Involve and gain commitment from all levels: workers to management" Provide specific training" Communicate relevant information / feedback" Management/supervisor support, recognition and enforcement

3. IDENTIFY NEW RISK FACTORS" Ongoing monitoring " Timely reviews" Obtain worker feedback" Assess all aspects of task

REDUCED MUSCULOSKELETAL RISK

WORKER PARTICIPATION

CONTROLSTRATEGY

ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS

Administrative controls are far less effective than design controls. Rather than controlling the riskdirectly – by designing out the hazard; administrative controls manage the risk by providing a barrierbetween the existing hazard and the worker.This may be either a physical barrier (such as theprovision of personal protective equipment) or a subjective barrier that is reliant on appropriateand/or compliant behaviour of workers.

Administrative controls are best used as part of a comprehensive control strategy; to complimentdesign controls or for short-term risk management.

Administrative controls are generally about implementing specific work arrangements which managethe risks [preferably documented – such as Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)], and typicallyinclude:

! Maintenance of plant, equipment and environment to reduce exposure to risk factors.! Strategies such as job rotation, task rotation, ensuring adequate staff numbers to meet work

demands and reducing shift length.! Return to work programs appropriate to individual fitness levels after extended periods

of leave.! The use of personal protective equipment; anti-vibration clothing such as gloves may reduce

exposure to vibration, shock absorbent shoes for work on hard (concrete) floors,

23

NOTE:1) The wearing of lifting belts when manually handling heavy loads is not recommended.2) If PPE is used to protect workers especially gloves and respiratory protection, consideration must

be given to the fact that PPE can adversely impact on the task demands by increasing themuscular effort to hold items, or contributing to awkward postures due to restricted head/neckmovement, vision.

A word on training

Training in manual tasks risk assessment and control is an important part of a manual tasks controlstrategy. However training in “correct lifting techniques” is not an effective control strategy and is notan appropriate part of manual tasks risk control.

Appropriate training

! All personnel should be provided with training following the implementation of new SOPs.! Training in the correct use of mechanical lifting aids, trolleys and how to perform preventative

maintenance.! Training in the identification of risk factors for manual tasks (forceful exertions, awkward

postures, vibration, repetition and duration).

General control options specific to risk factors are outlined in the following table. For some examplesof specific controls see section 1.3 Manual Tasks Case Studies, and the supplementary documentavailable at: http://ergonomics.uq.edu.au/download/surfacecontrols.pdf

24

General Control Options

25

RISK FACTORS

FORCEFUL EXERTIONS

AWKWARD POSTURES" forearms, hands" lower limbs" head/neck" back

REPETITION & DURATION

VIBRATION

CONTROL OPTIONS

" Eliminate manual load handling by redesigning work process, task orlayout.

" Substitute human forceful exertion with other power sources –such as mechanical lifting aids.

" Substitute lifting & carrying with sliding load or using transport aidsi.e. trolleys.

" Significantly reduce weights of loads handled – or increase weightsand implement specialized lifting equipment.

" Consider hand tool features such as handles & tool usecharacteristics. Modify features of tools or plan purchase ofreplacement tools specifically to reduce awkward postures.

" Design specialised tools or levers to reduce awkward postures suchas twisting of wrist or forward bending.

" Redesign work benches to suitable heights." Redesign load transfer points to minimise lifting such as between

trolleys, vehicles and storage areas.

" Eliminate repetitive task." Job rotation." Job enlargement." Use more effective tools & equipment to reduce length of time

spent on task.

Whole-body:" Improve vehicle suspension." Install specialised shock absorbent seating." Maintain roads and ground surfaces." Drive vehicles at lower speeds." Maintain vehicles.Hand/arm:" Implement a policy to consider vibration characteristics of tools

pre-purchase." Use anti-vibration handles or internal damping mechanisms

(manufacturers may be able to advise of any accessories ormodifications available).

" Engineer a support for the tool – such as isolated fixtures or toolstands.

" Provide external damping such as covering handles with dampingmaterials or providing vibration-absorbing gloves.

26

1.3 Manual Tasks Case StudiesThis section provides examples of the application of the PErforM risk assessment tool. Case study 1 demonstrates in detail the use of the tool.The resulting controls were suggested by the group ofworkers who participated in the risk assessment process. Case studies 2 & 3 provide a brief outline of the risk factors identified in two tasks at open cut mine sites.The controls presented in these casestudies were actually implemented at the relevant sites as part of the project.

Case study 1 – Worked ExampleRetrieving and attaching sling for towing bogged haul truck: Mining crew.



DATE & WORKPLACE

Date: Workplace: Mining XYZ

RISK ASSESSORS

Work Unit / Team: Team APositions: Superintendent and 4 operatorsNames: Joe, Bill,Tom, Jack, and Rob

TASK DESCRIPTION

Name of task: Handling and attaching sling for towing bogged haul trucksWhy was this task selected? This task was selected for assessment because it is heavy andawkward, needs to be done with maximum speed and occurs at unplanned, irregular intervals.Thistype of occurrence can lead to a makeshift approach using unsuitable equipment and procedures ifthe task has not been adequately assessed beforehand.The task was broken into two discrete processes for the purpose of profiling the risk factors:" Handling sling" Lifting sling and eye on to truck attachmentLocation where task occurs: Out on site – often at night in deep mud.Who performs the task: Any members of team – 3–5 workers depending on availabilityGeneral description: Box trailer containing sling is transported to area near bogged haul truck. Slingis coiled and often tangled in trailer, and is manually dragged out of trailer by 2–3 workers. Cable islaid out on ground, straightened and then the sling is carried by 2 people to the haul truck.Toattach eye to truck, the sling is lifted whilst in a standing or crouching position.Postures: Forward bending, twisting and reaching to grasp sling and drag out of trailer ; crouchingand stooping to fit underneath truck, whilst lifting eye to attach to truck.Forceful/muscular exertions: A large amount of force needed to manoeuvre sling out of trailer,force also required to carry sling and eye to truck, and more exertion to attach eye to truck. Alsowalking in deep mud forceful exertion for legs.Repetition and duration: There is some repetition and duration when handling sling but overall, thetask is not highly repetitive,Tools or equipment used: Box trailer – fairly inadequate, but better than nothing.Work/task organization and environment: Number of workers varies – usually 3 at worst 2.Timingof task unpredictable due to circumstances of bogged vehicles. Difficult environmental conditions –night time, mud and wet weather.

27

RISK ASSESSMENT: Handling sling

EXERTION BODY PART

AWKWARD POSTURE

VIBRATION

DURATION

REPETITION

RISK CONTROLSDESIGN CONTROL OPTIONS: (Eliminate, Substitute, Engineer)Trailer design should include device to control the way the sling is stored. It was suggested a trailerof the style that is typically used to transport pipes could be utilised in conjunction with a winch.Rollers could be installed to assist with the placement of the sling.The winch could be used to elevate the sling to the height of the tow point.The winch should be installed at a height that allows it to be operated (if manual) with minimal forward bending.A motorised winch that could be controlled from the operators cab would reduce the number of people having to enter the bogged area. Also consider attachment point on truck when settingwinch height to ensure a reduction of reach distance and awkward postures when attaching sling.The strength to weight ratio of the sling material should be considered so that the sling is as light as possible, while providing the strength needed to perform the task. Similarly, the optimal length of the sling should be considered and kept to a minimum, it was suggested that 10–15 m should be an adequate length.

ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OPTIONS:Slings to be stored in and transported by trailer at all times – not dragged across ground as thiscauses wear and tear which affects the handling and strength properties of the sling.

28

1No effort






1

None

2 3

Moderate

4 5

Extreme

1 < 10 minutes

2

10–30 min

3

30 min – 1 hr

4

1–2 hrs

5

> 2 hrs

1 No repetition



RISK ASSESSMENT: Lifting sling and eye to attach to truck.

EXERTION BODY PART

AWKWARD POSTURE

VIBRATION

DURATION

REPETITION

RISK CONTROLSDESIGN CONTROL OPTIONS: (Eliminate, Substitute, Engineer)Permanently attach length of chain with appropriate eye to haul truck and secure out of the wayalong bumper bar.This chain could then be dropped down when needed to the sling still stored on trailer. Automatic release of chain a further option.Fix 4 or more anchor points to haul truck bumper bar at different angles to allow for use of acumalong or small chain block to pull recovery sling under truck to tow point.Fix towbar to front of towing vehicle to allow a front on approach and improve vision.Single axle trailer suggested to improve trailer access to vehicle whilst minimising risk of boggingextra vehicles.

ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OPTIONS:Develop driver education training packages for truck and dozer operators, water cart drivers andothers (including contractors) charged with attending to the dump.Training should address optimaldumping conditions and maintenance of conditions. Dozer drivers to pack hard fill into soft spotsand communicate with truck drivers when problem areas identified.Highlight boggy areas, for example by installing extra lighting plants to assist with night vision andhelp reduce the likelihood of dumping in bad areas.

29

1No effort






1

None

2 3

Moderate

4 5

Extreme

1 < 10 minutes

2

10–30 min

3

30 min – 1 hr

4

1–2 hrs

5

> 2 hrs

1 No repetition



Case Study 2: Cleaning feeders and shutes; CHPP crew

Depending on feed conditions,Operators were required to loosen clay and coal build up in shootsup to 2-3 times per shift.

Crowbars were used as theprimary means to loosen build-up.

Manual Tasks Risk Factors

The risk assessment identified forceful exertions and awkward postures,particularly for the upper body. Over the year, numerous injuries including shoulder and back strainshave been attributed to this task.

Manual Tasks Controls

Design Controls:1) Installation of a water injection system directly into the shoots has resulted in significantly reducing

the amount of material collected and the need for maintenance.The system can be operatedfrom the control room. Maintenance contractors installed the system with the electrical workconducted by on site electricians.

2) Crowbars have been replaced by water lances.The water lance is a length of 1 inch pipe with a valve and “mince up coupling”. It was manufactured on site.The water hose is attached to thefirewater system achieving greater water pressure.The use of the lance with high water pressuresignificantly reduces the workers need to utilise upper body strength and force.

Detail of lance and hose coupling Operator holding water lance

30

CASE STUDY 3: Cleaning Magnets; CHPP crew

The conveyor belt transporting coal has amagnet suspended over it to remove any loose metal rubbish.The magnet is inspected daily, metal on the magnet surface isdumped 1–2 times per week.

Manual Tasks Risk Factors

The risk assessment of the task identified extreme forceful exertions as the major risk factor; inparticular the upper body was at risk of musculoskeletal injury. Some awkward postures were alsoidentified.

Manual Tasks Controls

Design Controls:A new automated system was designed by a consultant and manufactured off site by contractors at acost of $9865.00 (materials) and $12464.00 (labour). It operates by a standard start/stop/reset pushbutton control panel; an air control lever moves the magnet in and out.This completely eliminates allmanual handling associated with task.

A similar control implemented by another mine site, shown above right.

31

To slip or trip may not seem a serious health and safety issue. Many of us have slipped or tripped athome or outdoors, possibly sustaining minor injuries. A slip or trip in the workplace can potentially bemuch more serious.This is particularly so for the open cut coal mining industry.The person falling cansustain severe injuries due to falling onto hard surfaces, down stair wells, from heights, or falling ontohazardous objects around them such as sharp items, moving objects – machinery, hot items or intothe pathway of moving plant. Injuries as a result of slips, trips and falls in the coal mining industry havenumbered on average over 200 compensated injuries per year (NOHSC National Workers’Compensation Statistics database 1997-2000).This equates to one worker suffering a compensableinjury due to a slip or trip roughly every 1.5 days.Types of injuries to workers as a result of fallsinclude cuts, abrasions, bruising and musculoskeletal injuries (including sprains, strains and fractures).Such injuries are costly – requiring significant time off work, and may result in permanent adverseeffects.

According to the NOHSC statistics, the most predominant mechanism of injury in this category is ‘fallson the same level’. Over the same years, the number of injuries due to falls on the same level is overfour times the number of injuries due to falls from heights.This indicates that trip and slip hazards inwork areas and walkways are not being managed in a way that adequately reduces the risk.

The following sections of this handbook provide practical guidance including control options forreducing slip and trip hazards in the open cut coal mining industry. Firstly, it is important to identifyfactors that contribute to slip-trip incidents.

Why do we slip and trip?A slip or trip in an open cut coal mining workplace and the resultant fall usually occurs due to thepresence of one or more of the following risk factors:

! Uneven and cluttered pedestrian surfaces.! Poor design characteristics (both visual and physical aspects) of access and egress systems! Insufficient frictional qualities of the ground surface and/or footwear.

These risk factors are quite simple, and there is nothing new about them – in fact they are obvious toanyone working in the industry.The problem is that despite their simplicity these risk factors are notbeing managed adequately to eliminate the risk.This is evidenced by the number of injuries resultingfrom slips, trips and falls.

As with manual tasks risks, the control hierarchy for slips, trips and falls can also be thought of interms of design and administrative controls.The most effective control strategy is to design theworkplace and access systems to reduce slips, trips and falls.The following discussion of risk factorsprovides some examples of control options to manage the risk factors for slips, trips and falls.

32

SECTION 2 – SLIPS, TRIPS AND FALLS

2.1 Uneven And Cluttered SurfacesAcross the open cut coal mining industry many of the surfaces tend to be uneven, the following areaswere observed to be high risk areas in this regard:

1) field operations, and2) floors and stairways in wash plants and workshop areas.

1) Field Operations

Out in the field where the mining process actually occurs, the primary traffic is vehicular.The groundsurfaces are also used by workers when moving between plant/vehicles and when undertakingmaintenance tasks.The ground surface becomes uneven due to tyres from numerous heavy vehiclesleaving commonly found undulations. Rubble and loose soil also contribute to making the groundunstable for walking on.

Controls" Many sites implement an efficient roadway maintenance system dedicated to ensuring regular

grading of roadways." Where possible allocate specific areas for use by pedestrians. Implement a system to ensure

continuous clearing of rubble from pedestrian areas." Ensure adequate lighting to highlight pedestrian access ways and any hazardous areas." All site personnel should be provided with well fitting boots which provide adequate ankle support

to protect against rolling or twisting ankles as a result of walking on loose ground surfaces.

2) Wash Plants and Workshop Areas

Floor areas within wash plants were frequently observed to have cluttered surfaces. Feedback fromCHPP personnel and contractors also indicated that cluttered wash plant floors are a significant issue.As well as creating a slip-trip hazard, the presence of these hazards also impacts on the use of trolleysand mechanical devices – trolleys cannot be pushed over cluttered ground surfaces, increasing thelikelihood of manual tasks injury.

Rubble and general debris from the coal process methods is a prominent source of clutter for floorsof wash plants. Clutter from a variety of sources was also observed laying on the workshop floors.This included tools, materials, rubbish, parts of machinery and pieces of plant set out (such as duringthe undertaking of a maintenance task), hoses from pneumatic power tools and hoses used to cleancoal away.

Uneven areas observed in wash plants and workshops were also observed.These were mainly due todeteriorating concrete/bitumen, changes in ground Ievel as a result of structural additions and poorlydesigned ramps.

33

Controls" To minimise clutter install storage facilities with easy access such as: reels for hoses in a suitable

location; tool storage locations; and storage facilities for other equipment." Locate and mark specific areas for work requiring the set out of pieces of plant, or trailing of hoses.

These areas should be away from general pedestrian thoroughfares." Locate and mark pedestrian areas which are then to be kept clear for pedestrian and trolley use." Minimise coal spillage by redesign and attention to maintenance schedules." Thorough, regular housekeeping procedures allocated to specific individuals will ensure general

waste, clutter and water build-up are kept to a minimum." When planning new workshops, wash plants or additions, designers should consider all potential

workers to ensure changes in gradient facilitate the use of any assistive devices likely to beemployed. Ramps should have a slope of no more than 1 in 8.

" Conduct preventative maintenance to ensure the integrity of floor surfaces." Highlight trip hazards with lighting, signage or other alerting devices

Witches hats highlight sling lying across floor

" Ensure lighting is well directed and not visually distracting, in accordance with AS 1680.1 – 1990,Interior Lighting, Part 1: General principles and recommendations.

" Install drainage channels and drains where floors are likely to become wet.Where eliminating the hazard is not possible, highlight or warn workers of the hazard withconspicuous signage and well directed lighting.

34

2.2 Poor Design Characteristics Of Access And Egress SystemsBoth physical and visual aspects of access and egress systems are extremely important factorsaffecting their ease of use.

Workers use access systems as part of performing a task thus they may often be carrying items, or be distracted by thoughts of the task at hand. Pedestrians are likely not concentrating on safe use ofthe access system, and may fail to observe any changes in ground surface, or be confused by markingswhich make it more difficult to distinguish edges and/or height changes (such as from last stair treadonto landing). Confusion may also be caused by other cues that may not complement each othersuch as hand rails running short of the stairway.

The following areas were noted for having poor design characteristics:

1) Walkways and stairways2) Conveyor belt walkways3) Vehicle access

1.Walkways and Stairways

Consider the following scenario:The ‘walkway’ here exposes the worker to risk of a fall. The surface is insufficient – the foot supports provide little friction and they are poorly defined visually.Note lack of hand rails and edging.

ControlsGeneral walkways" Ensure good frictional surface qualities that are adequate for the gradient." Avoid sudden changes in friction, such as slopes or changes in floor surface – if such areas exist

then highlight with visual cues and effective lighting." Provide adequate drainage to minimise build up of contaminants and facilitate cleaning." Provide hand rails on ramps.

Stairways" Ensure stairways comply with AS 1657-1992. Fixed platforms, walkways, stairways and ladders –

Design construction and installation. Provide adequate and consistent rise and going dimensions." Appropriate tread surface and frictional qualities" Ensure good nosing characteristics – well defined nosing to stand out from treads, good slip resistance." Consider the visual effects of prints and pattens on landing features and lower walkway

features – lines and other markings can visually confuse user." Provide handrails that extend at least to last tread." Provide adequate lighting – see AS 1680.1-1990.

35

2. Conveyor belt walkways

" At open cut coal sites, walkways become heavily cluttered with coal rubble making walking onthese surfaces very difficult and hazardous. Many walkways have a sloping gradient, which increasesthe risk of slipping.The walkway surface is typically manufactured from mesh.There are a number ofnegative issues associated with using mesh walkways including:

" The mesh tends to trap coal.When a pedestrian steps on the coal, it may fall through the mesh orbreak apart resulting in a very unstable surface.

" The mesh also provides very little surface area for contact with the walker’s shoe – more of anissue when gradient changes.

" Another issue is the difficulty associated with clearing coal from the mesh. A number of manualcleaning options are utilised, such as shovelling walkways, or prodding loose coal through gaps inmesh.These tasks are problem manual tasks, exposing workers to risk of musculoskeletal injury dueto risk factors such as forceful exertions, awkward postures and repetition and duration.

ControlsThe ideal control would be to take all steps possible to prevent coal spillage.This may involve redesignand engineering solutions.

Failing this, the next option is the use of checker plate for walkways.This material provides a solidsurface to walk on and workers can hose coal rubble through specially designed channels, furtherreducing the risk of manual tasks injury. It is important to ensure that there is adequate drainage tominimise build up of water.

36

Vehicle access

Many vehicles are manufactured and sold without adequate access systems. As a result, workers eitherclimb onto vehicles as best they can, or sites have added access systems post purchase.There were anumber issues identified in relation to vehicle access.Where no provision has been made for access,operators climb onto the vehicle using tyres, and other plant attachments for foot and hand holds.These surfaces are often wet and muddy, or dusty and are not designed for adequate grip andsupport.This exposes people to the risk of slipping. Individuals may also assume awkward posturesand require forceful exertions, for example in their upper body when pulling themselves up.

Access is also required to areas of plant and vehicles for maintenance purposes, re-fuelling and changing oil. Again,people have been observed adopting awkward postureswith forceful exertions to gain access and perform the required tasks.

37

Controls" Wherever practical, it is an important control strategy for sites to design and install appropriate

vehicle access systems.When doing so, the following factors should be considered:" Use appropriate material for the tread surface, ensuring adequate slip resistance and durability with

exposure to the elements." Determine appropriate height of the first tread from ground level. In a changing work environment

ground levels may vary; adjustable systems may be advantageous." Provide hand rails/supports." Ensure that at the top of access system where door access is required that there is adequate head

room, suddenly having to duck may result in loss of balance and a fall." Consider the need for landings and guard rails." The painted colour of the access system should be different from the vehicle colour to provide

maximum visibility." Also consider the impact of an access system on other requirements of plant operation such as

access required for maintenance.

Access for maintenance considerations:" Relocate fill points so that they are easily accessible." Provide plant (mobile elevating work platforms) to give access." Undertake planning to minimise field maintenance – it is preferable to perform maintenance in

workshops whenever possible.

38

2.3 Frictional QualitiesSurfaces for walkways, stairs and ramps need to have adequate frictional qualities.The level of frictionneeded varies according to gradient, and whether contaminants such as water, dust, mud or oil arelikely to be present.

The frictional qualities of the pedestrian surface and the foot wear of the pedestrian impact on thewalking style of the individual. If the friction is high, then taking longer strides at a faster pace ispossible, without compromising safety.With lower friction, the walker slows down the pace, and takesmuch smaller steps.When the surface friction changes unexpectedly, the pedestrian may not havetime to alter their walking style. Loss of grip or a slip may result followed by a fall with serious injuries.

Controls" Identify and redesign areas where the frictional qualities may change such as areas affected by

surface contaminants or where changes in the gradient or surface material occur." If such changes are not able to be eliminated, highlight these areas with lighting and visual cues." Prevent or minimise contaminants on floor surfaces." Implement stringent housekeeping practices to reduce build-up of contaminants." Provide suitable anti-slip footwear.

39

Workplace health and Safety Queensland, (2000). Manual Tasks Advisory Standard 2000.

Workcover New South Wales, (1998). Guidance note on preventing slips, trips and falls.

Australian Standard AS 1657-1992. Fixed platforms, walkways, stairways and ladders – Design constructionand installation. Standards Australia, Sydney.

Australian Standard AS 1680.1-1990 Interior Lighting, Part 1: General principles and recommendations.Standards Australia, Sydney.

McPhee, B., Foster, G., Long, A. (2001). Bad Vibrations. Joint Coal Board Health and Safety Trust and theNational Occupational Health and Safety Commission (Worksafe Australia), Sydney.

Supplementary controls document: Reducing Musculoskeletal Risk in Open Cut Coal Mining located at:http://ergonomics.uq.edu.au/download/surfacecontrols.pdf

Further information for the minerals industry may also be found on the web site for the MineralsIndustry Safety and Health Centre: http://www.mishc.uq.edu.au

A range of public domain documents relating to ergonomics is also available from the UQ Ergonomicsweb site: http://ergonomics.uq.edu.au

40

FURTHER READING

41

ATTACHMENT



SAMPLE



DATE & WORKPLACE

Date: Workplace:

RISK ASSESSORS

Work Unit / Team:Positions:Names:

TASK DESCRIPTION

Name of task:

Why was this task selected?

Location where task occurs:

Who performs the task:

General description:

Postures:

Forceful/muscular exertions:

Repetition and duration:

Tools or equipment used:

Work/task organization and environment:

#


RISK ASSESSMENT1. Indicate on the body chart which area of the body you feel is affected by the task.2. If more than one body part is affected you may shade the different body parts in different

colours. If so, use the matching colour when scoring the risk factors e.g. red for arms on thebody and score sheet, blue for low back on the body and score sheet.

3. Give each risk factor a score out of five. One (1) is when the risk factor is not present and five(5) is when exposure to the risk factor is the most severe possible.

EXERTION BODY PART

AWKWARD POSTURE

VIBRATION

DURATION

REPETITION

RISK CONTROLSDESIGN CONTROL OPTIONS:(Eliminate, Substitute, Engineer)

ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OPTIONS:

1No effort






1

None

2 3

Moderate

4 5

Extreme

1 < 10 minutes

2

10–30 min

3

30 min – 1 hr

4

1–2 hrs

5

> 2 hrs

1 No repetition



#


NOTES

This handbook is one of the outcomes of an ACARP funded research project – “Reducingmusculoskeletal risk in open cut coal mining”. Information is provided on the identification andcontrol of both traditional risk factors for developing musculoskeletal injuries and the riskfactors for slips, trips and fall incidents, which can also result in musculoskeletal injuries.The handbook outlines the use of the Participative Ergonomics for Manual Tasks (PErforM)risk assessment tool and discusses general control options illustrating the process by whichcontrols might be implemented.

An accompanying video is available for use in conjunction with the handbook.To obtain a copy of the video contact Robin Burgess-Limerick ([email protected]). Examples of controls are also provided in a supplementary electronic document located at:http://ergonomics.uq.edu.au/download/surfacecontrols.pdf

Users of this hand book may include:

Management, who may use the handbook to further understand the benefits andimportance of a participative approach incorporating representatives from acrossthe workforce when developing, designing, purchasing and implementing controls.(See Section 1.2 Manual Tasks Control Strategies).

Safety Advisors, OHS representatives and those charged with addressing onsitehealth and safety issues may be able to use this handbook in a number of ways:

! Assessment of problem manual tasks using the PErforM risk assessmenttool.

! Application of the information on control development andimplementation in Section 1.2.

! The handbook and accompanying video may also be useful for trainingonsite employees and contractors in identifying the risk factors fordeveloping musculoskeletal injuries.

Operators from across all areas will benefit by the practical application of the PErforM risk assessment tool.The ability to identify the risk factors formusculoskeletal injuries within the operators own job demands will allow the operator to play an essential role in reducing their personal risk of injury.



Appendix C: Final Video

Manual Tasks Risk Management [Video]

Burgess-Limerick, R. (2004). Manual Tasks Risk Management [Video]. The Universityof Queensland. Duration: 15 Min.



Appendix C: Supplementary Controls Document

Manual Tasks Controls for Open Cut Coal Mining

http://ergonomics.uq.edu.au/download/surfacecontrols.pdf

Nicholson, M., & Leveritt, S. (2004). Manual Tasks Controls for Open Cut CoalMining. The University of Queensland.

1

Surface Controls Document

This document provides examples of various control options that have been used to

reduce the risk of musculoskeletal injury and/or slip trip hazards within the open cut coal

mining industry. Many of the controls have been sourced from different open cut coalmine sites across NSW and QLD. Other controls have been sourced through

organisations such as NIOSH and various publications. Certainly many of these controls

have been in use for some time, and may be very well-known within certain sites.However, a finding of the research project “Reducing Musculoskeletal Risk in Open Cut

Mining” has been that despite the existence of effective controls, there is a lack of

awareness of the availability of relevant controls and thus many workers are still being

exposed to the risk of injury. It was further identified that there was a need for thisindustry to have access to an information source outlining a number of control options

for common health and safety issues, in particular for the reduction of musculoskeletal

risk and slip/trip hazards.

The controls presented in this document are examples only. When used as a guide,

these controls may provide information on some options available to reduce the risk ofmusculoskeletal injury associated with performing a particular task. The examples

provided may need modifications to ensure their suitability and that they meet the

specific circumstances and health and safety requirements for individual sites.

Each control is presented in brief and includes: a summary of the task, manual tasks risk

factors, a solution summary and a matrix providing a comparison of ‘before and after’

risk factor ratings1. Costs have been provided when available.

The controls are divided into three main sections Washplant, Workshop and Mining

Operations.

- Washplant

- Workshop

- Mining

Implementing Controls

The risk assessment process is a critical stage of successfully implementing controls.More information on performing risk assessments for manual tasks can be found in the

handbook: “Reducing Musculoskeletal Risk in Open Cut Coal Mining”, where use of the

PErforM Risk assessment tool is outlined.For a free copy of this handbook please forward an email with your request to

[email protected]

User Feedback

If you would like to comment on the controls presented in this document, or contribute

your own ideas and/or successful controls for consideration then please send your emailto [email protected]

1 This risk factor matrix has been developed as part of the PEforM risk assessment tool, and slightly

modified for use within this control document.

2

CONTROLS INDEX

Control Option Page No.

Washplant Controls

Conveyor systems:

Conveyor Spillage

1. BACT........................................................................................... 3

2. Upgrading walkways.................................................................... 4

Roller Change out

3. Air bags ....................................................................................... 5

4. Conveyor Jacks ........................................................................... 6

Other

5. Cleaning magnets........................................................................ 7

6. Coal Sampling ............................................................................. 8

7. Hosing Access............................................................................. 9

8. Tilting Screen for Maintenance .................................................... 10

Workshop Controls:

9. Transporting Work Platforms ....................................................... 11

10. Transporting Heavy items (eg. gas cylinders).............................. 12

11. Changing Tyres ........................................................................... 13

12. Unloading Delivery Truck............................................................. 14

Mining Controls

13. Pin Change out............................................................................ 15

14. Transporting Dragline Pins .......................................................... 16

3

15. Cable Pulling ............................................................................... 17

16. Decanting Oil ............................................................................... 18

17. Washing Vehicles ........................................................................ 19

Vehicle design features

18. Access to Material Bin/Top of Truck ............................................ 20

19. Access to Cabin........................................................................... 22

20. Operator Views............................................................................ 23

4

1. CONVEYOR SPILLAGE

BEFORE:

TASK DETAILS:Inadequate engineering and design of conveying systems mayresult in massive amounts of coal spillage and carryback. As aresult, thousands of hours of manual labour are required inregular clean up tasks and removal of the spillage.

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:

Forceful exertions

Awkward postures

Repetition and Duration

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral

2 3Moderatelyuncomfortable

4 5Veryuncomfortable

VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION: BACT

COSTS: N/A COPYRIGHT: NO

SOURCE: NIOSH Mining Safety Solutionswww.cdc.gov/niosh/mining/safetysolutions/csh.htm

DESCRIPTION:

Eliminating the risk is the most desirable control option. This

would involve applying the best available control technology

(BACT) for mine conveying systems. Conveying systems need

to be designed specifically to address potential spillage and

reduce this to the lowest practical level.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:

Effectively designed conveying systems have reduced spillage

from 3.0% to 0.5%. Even a 2.0% reduction has been shown to

translate to a 67% cost reduction for conveyor maintenance

due to spillage and carryback. Further, less time spent

performing the manual task of conveyor maintenance equates

to a reduction in risk exposure.

Retrofitting improvements has also produced dramatic results,such as eliminating nearly all the spillage at a transfer point.

Elimination is the ultimate solution to conveyor spillage. Where

this is not a feasible solution, the following options may assist in

the reduction of exposure to manual tasks risk factors

associated with the ongoing cleaning and removal of spillage.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

5

2. CLEANING COAL FROM WALKWAYS

BEFORE:

TASK DETAILS:Conveyor belt walkways constructed of mesh. Coal fromspillage tends to become caught between grids.Washplant operators are required to clear coal from walkways.Task involves shovelling and scraping loose coal from walkway.Task length could take up to 5 hours of shift.

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Forceful exertionsAwkward posture (bending forward)Repetition and durationForceful exertionJarring also experienced by operator (metal on metal)

OTHER HAZARDS:Trapped coal creates a slip, trip hazard on walkway.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION: UPGRADE WALKWAYS

COST: N/A COPYRIGHT: No

DESCRIPTION: Design Control

As an alternative to mesh, walkways can be constructed fromchequered plate with elevated channels. Walkways may thenbe cleared of coal by high pressure hosing. Coal is directed offwalkway by channels and down drainage system.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:The benefits are large in that it eliminates the shovelling taskand associated risk factors. Need to consider that hosing mayalso expose operators to forceful exertions and repetition, othercontrols may be needed to manage these risks, such as jobrotation, lighter hoses and reduced water pressure.Also need to consider safety aspect. Inclined chequered platewalkways may constitute a slip hazard - especially when wet.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:Use of channels with drainage system could be applied to anywalkway including washplant floors to reduce the containmentof water.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

6

3. ROLLER CHANGEOUT

BEFORE:

No photo

TASK DETAILS:Operators required to lift conveyor belts during maintenance,such as roller change out to provide adequate clearance foroperator who has to lie across the lower belt.

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Forceful exertionsAwkward postures

OTHER HAZARDS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION: AIRBAGS

COSTS: COPYRIGHT:

DESCRIPTION:

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:This control only reduces forceful exertions andawkward postures associated with raising conveyorbelt. The task of removing and replacing rollers stillexposes operators to risk of musculoskeletal injurydue to forceful exertions and awkward postures.Benefits of the air bag are that it practicallyeliminates all forceful exertions and awkwardpostures associated with actual lifting of belt,

Inflation of bag using vehicle exhaust requiresvehicle access to conveyor belt area.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

7

4. CONVEYOR BELT LIFTING FRAMES

BEFORE:

No photo

TASK DETAILS:Operators required to lift conveyor belts during maintenance,such as roller change out.


OTHER HAZARDS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:COSTS: N/A COPYRIGHT: YesSOURCE: SANDVIK – MATERIALS HANDLING SYSTEMS

www.materialshandling.sandvik.com/au

DESCRIPTION:Jack action of raising conveyor belt, eliminating operatorphysically lifting the belt.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:This control only reduces forceful exertions and awkwardpostures associated with raising the conveyor belt. Thetask of removing and replacing rollers still exposesoperators to risk of musculoskeletal injury due to forcefulexertions and awkward postures.

Benefits are that it practically eliminates all forcefulexertions and awkward postures associated with actuallifting of belt, providing a stable lifting device

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

8

5. CLEANING MAGNET

BEFORE:

TASK DETAILS:Operator required to pull and haul weight of magnet, usingwhole of body.

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Extreme forceful exertionsSome awkward posturesPotential for jarring

OTHER HAZARDS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION: AUTOMATE

COSTS: N/A COPYRIGHT: No

DESCRIPTION: Design controlOperator controlled mechanical operation.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Completely designs out all manual task risk factors.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:Across other mine sites. Mechanizing other tasks where loads aredumped.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

9

6. COAL SAMPLING

BEFORE:

TASK DETAILS:Operator bending forward to lift heavy samples of coal inbuckets.

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Forceful exertions: lower back, shoulders, hand & armsAwkward posture: picking up load from ground level.

OTHER HAZARDS:Walking with awkward load increase risk of trip injury

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:


DESCRIPTION: Design ControlRepositioned chute dispenses required amount of coal sample intobucket on raised platform.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Awkward postures are reduced, platform allows for sliding of bucketrather than picking up, reducing forceful exertions.Some exertion is required to slide bucket along platform due to friction.Reduced friction by improving bucket and/or platform surface will assistwith sliding.

Easily retrofitted.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

10

7. HOSING ACCESS

BEFORE:

TASK DETAILS:Hosing washplant areas

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Forceful exertions for hands and arms to hold and direct hoseespecially when held above shoulders.Awkward posture – arms working out in front of torso, handslifting above shoulders.Repetition and duration.

OTHER HAZARDS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:


DESCRIPTION: Design Control

Fabrication of a walkway to allow access for hosing

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Eliminate awkward postures, however still have forceful exertions todirect hose.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:The option to provide walkways to improve access to any area islimitless

RISKRATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

11

8. TILTING SCREEN FOR MAINTANENCE

BEFORE:

TASK DETAILS:Reaching handle and pulling down screen for access andmaintenance purposes.

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Forceful exertionsAwkward postures - particularly when operators of shorterstature attempting to complete task.

OTHER HAZARDS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:


DESCRIPTION:Hydraulic ram to manoeuvre screen down and up.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Completely eliminates all manual handling to tilt screen.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

12

9. TRANSPORTING WORK PLATFORMS

BEFORE:

No photo

TASK DETAILS:Transporting work platform to required area to assist withtask.


Large and bulky platform difficult to manoeuvre.

OTHER HAZARDS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION: Retrofit or purchase platforms withtransport device

COSTS: COPYRIGHT:

DESCRIPTION:Retrofitted wheels, with lever and handles to manoeuvre platform similarto trolley.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Careful consideration to design of handle wheel system to ensurestability and most efficient load carrying. Also need to ensure thatattachment does not affect stability of work platform when used as workplatform.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

13

10. TRANSPORTING HEAVY ITEMS

BEFORE:

No photo

TASK DETAILS:Operator manually handling heavy items such as gascylinders when needed for use or to place in storage.


OTHER HAZARDS:Increase in risk of slip or trip incident due to handlingawkward objects when walking through workshop.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:


DESCRIPTION:

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Trolleys can be multi purpose, or designed to custom fit requirements ofa particular handling task. Use of trolley greatly reduces forcefulexertions required by operator, and awkward postures. Emphasis needsto be taken during task design and layout of trolley with respect to load,to ensure operator is not required to twist back during transfer.

Need to ensure availability of task appropriate trolley when needed.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:Applicable to any and every situation where items are required to behandled for transfer needs.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

14

11. CHANGING TYRES

BEFORE:

TASK DETAILS:After removing nuts, workers manually remove tyres fromvehicle hub.

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Awkward posturesForceful exertionsRepetition duration

OTHER HAZARDS:RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:


DESCRIPTION: Design controlUtilise a lifting device (in this case a forklift) to remove tyres.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Different devices are available that would meed the needs for removingdifferent size tyres in different work environments. (Incl reference tosource for such ……)

Forklift truck may not be applicable to all situations and vehicles,however smaller lifting devices may be used.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

15

12. UNLOADING DELIVERY TRUCK

BEFORE:

TASK DETAILS:Operator required to retrieve delivery items from back of ute ortruck.

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Awkward PosturesForceful exertions

OTHER HAZARDS:Due to handling potentially bulky items, this may increaselikelihood of slip/trip incident occurring.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:


DESCRIPTION:Utilise forklift to unload delivered items.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Obviously this requires adequate space in unloading dock area,and within storage areas for fork lift access.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

16

13. PIN CHANGE OUT

BEFORE:

TASK DETAILS:Repeated striking of pin with sledge hammer required toloosen for removal.

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Forceful exertionsAwkward posturesVibration – as in jarring

OTHER HAZARDS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:


DESCRIPTION:Use of excavator with attachment to loosen and remove pins.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Possible to utilise already purchased item of plant.

Not all aspects of task can be conducted using this Kubota.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:Change out of all other pins – need different attachments.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

17

14. TRANSPORTING DRAGLINE PINS

BEFORE:

No photo

TASK DETAILS:Operator manually transports dragline pins to cabin of forklifttruck, where they are placed on floor. Area inside truck fairlydifficult to access.

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Forceful exertionsAwkward posturesRepetition

OTHER HAZARDS:Dropping rollers on feet while carrying.Instability of rollers in cabin during transport.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:

COSTS: Minimal as forklift truck already purchased for other tasks.

COPYRIGHT: No

DESCRIPTION: Design controlOperator positions forklift truck with pallet at suitable height to minimiseforward bending, and transfers rollers from belt to pallet, positioning therollers between the pallet slats, securing them from rolling.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Operator is still handling the pins; however changing the layout designand process, reduces the level of awkward postures - in particularforward bending, and subsequently dramatically reduces the forcesinvolved.Careful consideration should be given to design layout to ensure twistingis avoided.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:These principles can be applied to the transfer of any object: Designingfor consistent start and finish height, which should be within the regionspanning from mid-thigh to hip area. Avoid twisting between start of liftand finish – move feet to turn body.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

18

15. CABLE PULLING

BEFORE:

TASK DETAILS:Due to need to relocate cable, operator must bend forward tolift heavy cable.

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Extreme awkward posturesForceful exertionsRepetition and duration

OTHER HAZARDS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:


DESCRIPTION:Use of a cable lifting device to minimise forward bending. Also reducesforces and awkward postures to small muscles groups in hands due tohandle allowing for improved grip and handling of cable.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Still a manual task, and as such operators exposed to awkward posturesand some forceful exertions. Further improvements could be developedto eliminate this task, possibly by implementing use of a mechanicalhandling device.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

19

16. DECANTING OIL

BEFORE:

TASK DETAILS:Operator re-filling oil container.

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Operator unnecessarily exposed to forceful exertions andawkward postures.

OTHER HAZARDS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:


DESCRIPTION:Provision of a raised working area such as a low bench to reduceawkward postures required to perform task.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Operator will need to lift original oil container onto bench, considerationneeds to be given to an appropriate bench height.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

20

17. WASHING VEHICLES

BEFORE:

No photo

TASK DETAILS:Operators required to clean various vehicles or differing size.Some with access issues due to extreme heights of vehicle.Another difficulty in handling hose whilst accessing areas ofvehicles.


OTHER HAZARDS:Poor access to higher parts of vehicles.Slip/trip hazard associated with poor access, especially whenwet.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION: Custom built vehicle wash station


DESCRIPTION:

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Much improved access to reach upper sections of vehicles, also improvehose support and handling.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

21

18. ACCESS TO MATERIAL BIN / TOP OF TRUCK

BEFORE:

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Some forceful exertions associated with pulling body heightupwards, particularly where hand holds are too high fromground level.Awkward postures in due to inappropriate reach distances andother design violations.

OTHER HAZARDS:Increase in risk of slip and fall incident.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:


SOURCE: NIOSH Mining Safety Solutions

DESCRIPTION:Improve access to materials bins by design controls. Designladders to meet following criteria:! First step from the ground should be comfortably reached by

the shortest user, and at least two handholds must beaccessible while the user is still on the ground. (380–680mmoff the ground is a common range).

! Steps/rungs need to be of adequate width to support bothfeet simultaneously. Ensure adequate clearance behind stepto support midpoint ofthe shoe – not just toe.

! Ladder rungs shouldallow for wet andmuddy conditions, witha slip resistant surface.

! Each rung needs tospaced evenly apart.(Pref 280–300mm).

! Extend the top of theladder at least 1 metre above the ladder exit platform.

! Provide sufficient clearance for person exiting at top of truckto turn, access two handholds and face the ladder to climbdown.

! Incline ladder between 75° and 90°.! Provide continuous handrails and handholds with a non-slip

surface and a circular cross section.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Reduced awkward postures and forceful exertions, andreduced risk of slip and fall.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:These design principles can and should be applied to allvehicle access systems.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

TASK DETAILS:Operators require access to thematerial bins on top of the truck vialadder fixed at the back of truck.The ladder design variessignificantly between differenttrucks, and many designs violateaccepted design principles,including distance of first step andhand holds from ground, step/rungwidth and depth, provision ofadequate handrails along length ofladder, incline of ladder andclearance at top of truck for users.

22

19. CABIN ACCESS

BEFORE:

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Some forceful exertions associated with pulling body heightupwards, particularly where hand holds are too high fromground level.Awkward postures in due to inappropriate reach distances andother design violations.

OTHER HAZARDS:Increase in risk of slip and fall incident.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:



DESCRIPTION:! The first step should be easily reached from ground level by

smallest expected user.! At least two handholds should be located on the vehicle to

provide three points of contact while climbing into the vehicle.! Hand holds require non-slip surfaces and consideration for

adequate hand clearance.! Additional hand holds will accommodate different postures.! There must be adequate clearance with each step to support

the midpoint of the shoe – not just the toe.! Each step should be wide enough to allow both feet to rest on

the step.! The step surface should allow for wet and muddy conditions,

with a slipresistantsurface.

! Step spacingshould beconsistent.

! Make the stepsoffset, with awider bottomstep that iseasier to use.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Reduced awkward postures and forceful exertions, andreduced risk of slip and fall.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:These design principles can and should be applied to allvehicle cabin access systems.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

TASK DETAILS:Steps used to enterand exit the truckcabins also violateaccepted designprinciples, includingstep is not classed asa traditional stair, stairladder, or verticalladder.

23

20. TRUCK OPERATOR VIEW

BEFORE:

TASK DETAILS:Operators are required to assume awkward postures to observeposition of the prill boom and spout for filling the holes drilled inthe coal or overburden.

MANUAL TASKS RISK FACTORS:Forceful exertionsAwkward posturesVibration

OTHER HAZARDS:

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

SOLUTION:



DESCRIPTION:Options include:! Provision of largest practicable mirrors available which may

improve operator visibility.! Consider use of video camera or fibre optic images of the

target and laser or sonar signalling back to driver, or a hole-seeking spout.

LIMITATIONS & BENEFITS:Very little literature providing information on above options, stillat experimental stage.Benefits would be large in the best case with good designseliminating the extreme awkward postures and forcefulexertions.Still presence of other risk factors such as vibration, whichcontribute to the risk of musculoskeletal injury. A number ofcontrols are available for reducing operator exposure tovibration, including improved seating, vehicle modifications andmaintenance and quality road surfaces.

OTHER APPLICATIONS:Options available to consider for all types of vehicles requiringback of vehicle view.

RISK RATING:

EXERTION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Maximum

AWKWARD POSTURE

1Neutral



VIBRATION

1None

2 3Moderate

4 5Extreme

DURATION: MINUTES

1< 10 min

210-30min

330 min – 1 hr

41 – 2 hrs

5> 2 hrs

REPETITION

1None

2 3cycle time< 30 s

4 5cycle time< 10 s

Documents

Reducing Musculoskeletal Risk in Open Cut Coal MiningReducing Musculoskeletal Risk in Open Cut Coal Mining ACARP project C11058 Final Report August 31, 2004 Introduction Across all