İŞ YERİNDE ERGONOMİK RİSK DÜZEYLERİNİ AZALTMAK İÇİN REBA VE KARAKURİ KAİZEN TEKNİKLERİNİN UYGULANMASI

Abstract

Tekrarlayan işler ve uygun olmayan vücut duruşları ile yapılan işler kas-iskelet sistemi rahatsızlıklarına ve iş gücü kayıplarına neden olmaktadır. Tasarım, teknoloji ve insan ergonomik koşullarda bir araya gelmelidir. Bu çalışmada, hızlı tüm vücut değerlendirme yöntemi ile otomotiv üretim hatlarında çalışanların maruz kaldıkları ergonomik risk seviyeleri belirlenmiş ve risk seviyesi yüksek olan bir hatta antropometrik ölçümler ve ergonomik vücut duruşları dikkate alınarak Karakuri çalışma prensibine göre raf sistemi tasarlanmıştır. Bilgisayar destekli tasarım sayesinde üretim öncesi sistemin çalışması simüle edilmiş ve ergonomik risklere yönelik çözümler sunulabilmiştir. Mevcut durumda “yüksek” olan ergonomik risk seviyesi, yeni tasarlanan mekanizma ile azaltılabilmiş ve çalışanlar için ergonomik bir çalışma alanı sağlanabilmiştir. Yeni durumda ergonomik risk seviyesi “düşük”tür. Ergonomik iyileştirmelere ek olarak, çalışanın manuel taşıma işleri ortadan kaldırıldığından, ilk durumda 120 saniye olan hattın çevrim süresi, Karakuri mekanizmasının kullanımından sonra 100 saniyeye düşürülmüş ve hattın verimliliği %17 artmıştır.

Keywords

• Ergonomi
• Ergonomik tasarım
• Kaizen
• Karakuri
• Hızlı tüm vücut değerlendirmesi

APPLICATION OF REBA AND KARAKURI KAIZEN TECHNIQUES TO REDUCE ERGONOMIC RISK LEVELS IN A WORKPLACE

Abstract

Repetitive works and the works done with inappropriate body postures cause musculoskeletal disorders and workforce losses. Design, technology, and humans must come together in ergonomic conditions. In this study, the ergonomic risk levels that employees in automotive production lines being exposed to were determined by the rapid entire body assessment (REBA) method and by considering anthropometric measurements and ergonomic body postures at a line with high risk level, and a shelf system was designed in accordance with the Karakuri working principle. Through the computer-aided design, the system operation was simulated and solutions for ergonomic risks could be provided before the production. The ergonomic risk level, which was “high” in the current situation, could be reduced with the newly designed mechanism, and an ergonomic workspace could be provided for employees. In the new situation, the ergonomic risk level is “low.” In addition to ergonomic improvements, as the manual transportation works of the employee were eliminated, the cycle time of the line, which was 120 s in the first state, was reduced to 100 s after the use of the Karakuri mechanism and the efficiency of the line increases by 17%.

Keywords

• Ergonomics
• Ergonomic design
• Kaizen
• Karakuri
• Rapid entire body assessment

References

1. Akay, D., Dağdeviren, M., Kurt, M., 2003. Ergonomic Analysis of Working Postures. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 18, 73-84.
2. Akyol, H., 2017. Analysis of Working Positions in Textile Workshop by REBA. Master’s Thesis. Çukurova University, Adana.
3. Álvarez-Casado, E., Zhang, B., Sandoval, S.T., Pedro, M., 2011. Using Ergonomic Digital Human Modeling in Evaluation of Workplace Design and Prevention of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders Aboard Small Fishing Vessels. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 26(4), 463-72.
4. Anggrahini, D., Prasetyawan, Y., 2020. Indriyani Diartiwi SI. Increasing Production Efficiency Using Karakuri Principle (A Case Study in Small and Medium Enterprise). IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 852:012117.
5. Atıcı, H., Gönen, D., Oral, A., 2015. Ergonomic Analysis of Postures Causing Strain on Employees with REBA Method. Suleyman Demirel University Journal of Engineering Sciences and Design, 3, 239-244.
6. Bhanu, V.M., Kumar, S.M., 2018. Global Study and Implementation of Karakuri. Bachelor Thesis. Sweden Chalmers Tekniska Högskola, Gothenburg.
7. Boulila, A., Ayadi, M., Mrabet, K., 2018. Ergonomics Study and Analysis of Workstations in Tunisian Mechanical Manufacturing. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 28, 163-226.
8. Calzavara, M., Faccio, M., Persona. A., Zennaro, I., 2021. Walking Worker vs Fixed Worker Assembly Considering the Impact of Components Exposure on Assembly Time and Energy Expenditure. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 112, 2971-2988.

9. Daub, U., Gawlick, S., Blab, F., 2018. Ergonomic Workplace Design. Germany: Fraunhofer IPA.
10. David, G.C., 2005. Ergonomic Methods for Assessing Exposure to Risk Factors for Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders. Occupational Medicine, 55 (3), 190-199.
11. Detwiler, B., 2006. The Friendly Faces of Japanese Robots. [Tea serving puppets’ photo]. Available at: https://www.techrepublic.com/index.php/pictures/photos-the-friendly-faces-of-japanese-robots/6/. (Accessed 24 Nov 2020).
12. Ertaş, C., Bulut, Y., 2017. Ergonomy Activities Department. Journal of Engineering Sciences and Design, 5, 13-22.
13. Esen, H., Fığlalı, N., 2013. Working Posture Analysis Methods and the Effects of Working Posture on Musculoskeletal Disorders. Sakarya University Journal of Science, 17(1), 41-51.
14. Felekoğlu, B., Taşan, S., 2017. Ergonomic Risk Assessment for Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders: A systematic reactive/proactive integrated approach. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 32, 777-793.
15. Gönen, D., Oral, A.D., Ocaktan, M.A.B., Karaoğlan, A., Cicibaş, A., 2017. Ergonomic Analysis of Assembly Unit in a Transformer Company. Sakarya University Journal of Science, 21, 1067-1080.
16. Gönen, E., Kalınkara, V., 1993. Examining the Dimensional Measurements of Female Students Attending University. Proceedings of the 4th Ergonomics Congress, 93-107.
17. Hignett, S., McAtamney, L., 2000. Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA). Applied Ergonomics, 31(2), 201-205.
18. Janowitz, I.L., Gillen, M., Ryan, G., Rempel, D., Trupin, L., Swig, L., Mullen, K., Rugulies, R., Blanc, P.D., 2006. Measuring the Physical Demands of Work in Hospital Settings: Design and Implementation of an Ergonomics Assessment. Applied Ergonomics, 37(5), 641-658.
19. Joshi, M., Deshpande, V., 2020. Investigative Study and Sensitivity Analysis of Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA). International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 79.
20. Kara, Y., Atasagun, Y., Peker, A., 2014. Analysis of Working Posture with REBA Method in Assembly Lines and Ergonomic Risk Assessment. VII. International Occupational Health and Safety Conference. İstanbul, Turkey May 5-7.
21. Katayama, H., 2013. On Design and Analysis of Karakuri Contrivance Template Form Development for Analysis and Its Application Proceeding of 16th Annual National Meeting on Japan Society of Logistics Systems (JSLS). 25-28.
22. Kaya, Ö., Özok, A.F., 2017. The Importance of Anthropometry in Design. Journal of Engineering Sciences and Design, 5, 309-316.
23. Kılıç, A., Ayvaz, B., 2016. A Lean Manufacturıng Application in Turkish Automotive Industry. İstanbul Commerce University Journal of Science, 15, 29-60.
24. Kıraç, Y., 2005. Ergonomics at Management of Office and the Effect of Ergonomics to Productivity: An Example of Ankara Police Department. Master’s Thesis. Gazi University, Ankara.
25. Kurban, H., Kaygın, B., Tankut, A.N., 2016. The Usage of Anthropometric Measurement and Ergonomic Analysis in Furniture Design. İstanbul Commerce University Journal of Science, 6, 313-320.
26. Kutay, M.G., 2017. How Do I Build a Crane. [Calculation formulas and tables]. Available at: http://www.guven-kutay.ch/vinc/40_00_NasilVincYaparim.pdf/. (Accessed 24 Nov 2020).
27. Murata, K., Wakabayashi, K., Watanabe. A., Katayama, H., 2013. Analysis on Integrals of Lean Module Technologies. Research in Electronic Commerce Frontiers, 1(2), 21-29.
28. Nachemson, A., 1965. The Effect of Forward Leaning on Lumbar Intradiscal Pressure. Acta. Orthop Scand. 35, 314-328.
29. Paraponiaris, P.Y., 2019. Rodríguez MA. Implementation of Karakuri Kaizen. Bachelor Thesis. Sweden Skövde University, Skövde.
30. Parsons, K.C., 2000. Environmental Ergonomics; A Review of Principles, Method and Models. Applied Ergonomics, 31(6), 581-594.
31. Pavnaskar, S.J., Gershenson, J.K., Jambekar, A.B., 2003. Classification Scheme for Lean Manufacturing Tools. International Journal Production Research, 41(13), 3075-3090.
32. Peruzzini, M., Grandi, F., Cavallaro, S., Pellicciari, M., 2020. Using Virtual Manufacturing to Design Human-Centric Factories: An Industrial Case. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 1-15.
33. Pheasant, S., 2005. Haslegrave CM. Bodyspace: Anthropometry, Ergonomics and the Design of Work. 2nd ed. London, England: CRC Press.
34. Rani, D., Saravanan, A., Agrewale, M., Ashok, B., 2015. Implementation of Karakuri Kaizen in Material Handling Unit. SAE Technical Paper: 26, 0074.
35. Roser, C., 2017. Introduction to Karakuri Kaizen. [Karakuri kaizen]. Available at: https://www.allaboutlean.com/karakuri-introduction/. (Accessed 24 Nov 2020).
36. Sağıroğlu, H., Coşkun, M.B., Erginel, N., 2015. The Ergonomics Risk Analysis with REBA of Workstations Line. Suleyman Demirel University Journal of Engineering Sciences and Design, 3(3), 339-345.
37. Sakalar, E., 2018. The Analysis of Ergonomic Risk Factors in an Assembly Line with REBA Method: An Application in the Automotive Industry. Master’s Thesis. Izmir University of Economics, İzmir.
38. Tangl, A., Vajna, I., 2018. The Results of Lean Productivity Development Combined with Karakuri Kaizen Method. In: ICOM 8th International Conference on Management, 614.
39. Tanır, F., Güzel, R., İşsever, H., Polat, U., 2013. Musculoskeletal Disorders in an Automotive Manufacturing Plant and the Outcomes of Ergonomics and Exercise Training in Workers Who Used Sick Leave. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 59, 14-21.
40. Ulutaş, İ.B., Gündüz, T., 2017. Ergonomic Risk Analysis of Automotive Wire Harnesses. Uludag University Journal of the Faculty of Engineering, 22(2), 107-120.
41. Xiaobo, Z., Zhou, Z., Asres, A., 1999. A Note on Toyota’s Goal of Sequencing Mixed Models on an Assembly Line. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 36(1), 57-65.
42. Yapıcı, F., Baş H., 2015. Ergonomic Factors in Productivity. Suleyman Demirel University Journal of Engineering Sciences and Design, 3(3), 591-595.
43. Yararel, B., 2019. Ergonomic and Antropometric Effects in Office Design. J Journal Architecture and Life, 4(1), 141-153.
44. Yashvant Khire, M., Madnaik, S.D., 2001. Folding Cartons Using Low Cost Automation – A Case Study. Assembly Automation, 21(3), 210-212.
45. Yener, Y., Can, G.F., Toktaş, P., 2019. A Job Rotation Proposal Considering Physical Strain and Perceived Workload Level. Journal of Engineering and Architecture Faculty of Eskisehir Osmangazi University, 27, 9-20.