Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFord, Dave
dc.date.accessioned2017-01-18T20:28:12Z
dc.date.available2017-01-18T20:28:12Z
dc.date.issued1995
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10179/10275
dc.description.abstractTwo methods of ladder pruning Pinus radiata from 4.5 - 6.0 metres were compared using a cost-benefit approach within a framework provided by ergonomics. Chainsaw pruning is practiced in areas of New Zealand where large branches occur. The objectives of the research were to compare the costs and benefits of the two pruning techniques and provide recommendations as to whether or not the practice of chainsaw pruning should continue. These objectives were achieved by comparing the risk of injury, the physiological costs, the musculoskeletal costs, the productivity and the quality associated with the use of the two techniques. The general methods used to assess the relative costs and benefits of the two techniques were: l. Numeric descriptions of the 'risk' involved with each method of pruning 2. The use of a relative heart rate index to compare the physiological cost of the two techniques 3. Using questionnaires focusing on musculoskeletal pain and discomfort to assess any relative differences between the two techniques 4. Using continuous time study to quantify any difference in labour productivity between the two techniques 5. Sampling pruned trees to assess differences in the quality of work between manual and chainsaw pruning The research concludes that although both methods of pruning are hazardous, chainsaw pruning is more hazardous than manual pruning. Chainsaw and manual pruning were found to have the same physiological costs. Findings of the research indicate that manual pruning is not associated with a higher prevalence of musculoskeletal discomfort than chainsaw pruning on a yearly basis, although it is associated with a greater relative increase in BPD on a day to day basis and that this may lead to the development of musculoskeletal disease. Chainsaw pruning was found to be significantly more productive than manual pruning, although this was at the cost of quality. The research concludes by recommending that the use of chainsaw pruning should be limited to areas where the branches are demonstrably large. Further research is called for to compare the physiological and musculoskeletal costs of manual pruning in plantation areas of both large and small branch sizes. Further research is called for to compare the safety of two methods of chainsaw pruning with the use of the technique of wrapping one leg around the tree as opposed to not wrapping the leg around the tree. Research to investigate new ladder designs which are safer to use in the New Zealand forest environment is also called for.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherMassey Universityen_US
dc.rightsThe Authoren_US
dc.subjectForests and forestryen_US
dc.subjectEquipment and suppliesen_US
dc.subjectPinus radiataen_US
dc.subjectIndustrial safetyen_US
dc.subjectPruning -- Techniqueen_US
dc.subjectSaws -- Safety measuresen_US
dc.subjectChain saws -- Safety measuresen_US
dc.titleAn ergonomics analysis of manual versus chainsaw high ladder pruning of Pinus radiata in New Zealand : a thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Philosophy at Massey Universityen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
thesis.degree.disciplinePhilosophyen_US
thesis.degree.grantorMassey Universityen_US
thesis.degree.levelMastersen_US
thesis.degree.nameMaster of Philosophy (M. Phil.)en_US


Files in this item

Icon
Icon

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record