Physiological Cost And Subjective Assessment Of Rice  Transplanters For Women Operators

Bini Sam

doi:10.48165/

Authors

Bini Sam Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Kerala Agricultural University, Sadanandapuram, Kottarakkara – 691 531, Kerala (India)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48165/

Keywords:

Energy expenditure, ergonomics, heart rate, rice transplanters, women workers

Abstract

Several models of rice transplanters are available in the market to ease the transplanting work. However, the safety and efficiency aspects of these transplanters with respect to women workers has not been studied. Therefore, the present study was aimed to ergonomically evaluate the commercially available three models of rice transplanters viz., Redlands 8 row riding type transplanter, Mahindra 4 row walking type transplanter and Manual 2 row transplanter. A significant variation in heart rate and energy expenditure in the operation of different models of transplanters was observed. Heart rate was lowest in Redlands 8 row riding type transplanter (110.5 beats min-1) and maximum in traditional method of transplanting (148.5 beats min-1). The average heart rate before 9 am was 119.9 beats min-1 whereas after 11 am it increased to 142.8 beats min-1. Overall discomfort score varied from 3.0 to 8.4 and were scaled as " light discomfort" to "more than moderate discomfort" for selected operations. The body part discomfort score was maximum (46.8) in transplanting manually and minimum in transplanting with Redlands 8 row riding type transplanter (20.15). The work rest cycle was 30 min work followed by 2 min rest for Redlands 8 row riding type rice transplanter, 9 min rest for Mahindra walking type, 12 min rest for manual transplanter and 14 min rest for traditional method. Based on these results it was found that 8 row riding type transplanter was more suitable and ergonomically comfortable for the women operators.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ardle, M.C., Katch, F.I. and Katch, V.L.2001. Exercise Physiology (5th edn.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Publication, Philadelphia, USA.

Bridger, R.S. 1995. Introduction to Ergonomics. McGraw-Hill, New York, USA

Corlett, E.N. and Bishop, R.P. 1976. A technique for assessing postural discomfort. Ergonomics, 19: 175-182.

Jackson, A.S., Pollock, M.L. and Ward, A.S. 1980. Generalized equations for predicting body density of women. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 12: 175-182.

Kerala State Planning Board. 2016. Economic Review, 2016-2017. Agriculture and Allied Sectors. Department of Economics and Statistics, Kerala State Planning Board, Government of Kerala, India. (http://spb.kerala.gov.in/EconomicReview2016/web/chapter02_03.php).

Kroemer, K.H.E. and Grandjean, E. 2000. Fitting the Task to the Human - A Textbook of Occupational Ergonomics. Taylor & Francis, London, UK.

Kroemer, K.H.E., Kroemer, H.B. and Kroemer, K.E.E. 2000. Ergonomics - How to Design for Ease and Efficiency. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, USA.

Mohankumar, A.P., Anantha, K.D. and Kathirvel, K. 2013. Development of ergo refined coconut tree climbing device. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 8(44): 5530-5537. Murrell, K.F.H. 1965. Human Performance in Industry. Reinhold Publishing Co., New York, USA. NFSM. 2016. A Status Note on Rice India Based on Agricultural Statistics at a Glance 2015. National Food Security Mission, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmer’s Welfare, Government of India, New Delhi, India. [https://nfsm.gov.in/StatusPaper/Rice2016.pdf].

Ojha, P. and Kwatra, S. 2012. An ergonomic study on human drudgery and musculoskeletal disorders by rice transplanting. Studies on Home and Community Science, 6(1): 15-20. Ojha, P. and Kwatra, S. 2014. Development of MSD among farm women involved in traditional and mechanized method of rice cultivation of northern India. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 15(1): 162-166.

Pheasant, S. 1991. Ergonomics, Work and Health. Macmillan Press Ltd., London, UK. Ricepedia Online Encylopedia. A Project on CGIAR, Research Programme on Rice. CGIAR. [http://ricepedia.org/rice-as-a-crop/rice-productivity].

Saha, P.N., Datta, S.R., Banergee, P.K. and Narayanee, G.G. 1979. An acceptable work-load for Indian workers. Ergonomics, 22(9): 1059-1071.

Sam, B. 2015. Ergonomic evaluation of paddy seeder and rotary weeder with women pperators. pp. 1-8. In: Proceedings of 19 th Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association. 9-14 Aug., 2015, Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre, Melbourne, Australia.

Sam, B., Hameeda, B.V. and Regeena, S. 2019. Assessment of ergonomic parameters of coconut climbing devices for women. Current Science, 116(1): 127-133.

Vivek, P., Basavaraj and Vinayaka. 2014. Comparative ergonomic study of women workers on two row rice transplanter and cono-weeder. Agrotechnology, 2(4): 331-332.