Evaluation of the Effect of Safety Gloves on Hand-arm Vibration (HAV) Levels
Abstract No:
1710
Abstract Type:
Student Poster
Authors:
N Chen1, J Oh2
Institutions:
1University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 2UAB School of Public Health, Birmingham, AL
Presenter:
Nathan Chen
University of Alabama at Birmingham
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Faculty Advisor:
Jonghwa Oh
UAB School of Public Health
UAB School of Public Health
Description:
Occupations primarily using power hand tools such as groundskeeping and landscaping workers are vulnerable to the development of complex hand-arm vibration disorders, collectively known as hand-arm vibration syndrome (HAVS). When the workers are using power tools such as a weed eater and leaf blower, wearing general-purpose safety gloves is a general work practice. In this study, we evaluated the effect of safety gloves on the hand-arm vibration levels when simulating the operation of a weed eater and backpack blower. One of the most commonly used cowhide leather work gloves was tested and vibration dosimeters were used to measure acceleration levels. The study findings indicated the protective effect of the general work gloves for both power tools. More examinations on the damping effect of general-purpose safety work gloves need to be performed.
Situation/Problem:
Excessive, long term exposure to hand-arm vibration can induce vascular, neurological, and musculoskeletal disorders, collectively known as hand-arm vibration syndrome (HAVS). Many workers in grounds maintenance industry use hand-held power tools on a regular basis and they usually wear the general-purpose safety gloves when operating the tools. However, the effect of the general-purpose work gloves on the hand-transmitted vibration levels has not been fully examined, which is an important factor in the HAV exposure assessment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of safety gloves on the hand-arm vibration levels when simulating the operation of a weed eater and backpack blower.
Methods:
Two researchers alternatively operated a weed eater and backpack blower by changing roles: one time being a study subject and one time being a study operator (UAB IRB approval obtained). Each subject simulated the operation of each tool by swing the tool head/nozzle side to side for five minutes (n=3) and the magnitude of vibration (i.e., acceleration) was measured with vibration tri-axial dosimeters (SV103, Svantek SP. Z O. O., Warszawa, Poland). Cowhide leather gloves (Condor, W. W. Grainger Inc., Lake Forest, IL, U.S.), one of the most commonly used safety work gloves, were used and measurements were taken both when a subject was wearing gloves (G) and when not wearing gloves (NG). The dosimeters collected acceleration values from three orthogonal axes, awi, and vibration total values, ahv, (i.e., root-sum-of squares of the three axial values) every second for the duration of simulation. Percent differences between the data obtained with and without safety gloves were calculated to evaluate the effect of gloves on the vibration levels.
Results / Conclusions:
Results
For a weed eater, vibration total values, ahv, of a subject 1 measured from the right hand was 5.81 (G) and 7.18 m/s² (NG) and a subject 2 was 5.07 (G) and 5.62 m/s² (NG). ahv of a subject 1 measured from the left hand was 4.33 (G) and 5.14 m/s² (NG) and a subject 2 was 3.46 (G) and 4.54 m/s² (NG). Percent difference between G and NG was ranged from 10 to 31 when using a weed eater. The largest acceleration single-axis value, awi, on a weed eater was obtained from the x-axis and y-axis for the right hand and left hand, respectively.
For a blower, ahv of a subject 1 measured from the right hand was 2.00 (G) and 2.25 m/s² (NG) and a subject 2 was 1.10 (G) and 1.19 m/s² (NG). ahv of a subject 1 measured from the left hand was 0.10 (G) and 0.09 m/s² (NG) and a subject 2 was 0.10 (G) and 0.11 m/s² (NG). Percent difference between G and NG was ranged from 8 to 13 when using a blower. The largest awi on a blower was obtained from the y-axis for both right and left hand.
Overall, a decrease in vibration magnitude (i.e., ahv) was observed when the cowhide leather safety gloves were worn. Operation of a weed eater resulted in higher ahv than a backpack blower. ahv of the right hand were higher than the left hand most likely due to the tool design and operator technique. The subject 2 (i.e., tool operator 2) tended to have lower ahv than the subject 1 possibly due to the subject 1's stronger hand force. Dominant single-axis exposure on a blower was the y-axis while the x- and y-axis were dominant on a weed eater, mainly due to the handle axial direction.
Conclusion
This study showed the protective effect of the general-purpose leather work gloves when operating a weed eater and backpack blower. Use of the safety gloves is recommended especially when operating a weed eater even though they are not anti-vibration gloves. More investigations are needed to examine the effect of different types of gloves on the HAV levels as well as the effect of different types of power tools.
For a weed eater, vibration total values, ahv, of a subject 1 measured from the right hand was 5.81 (G) and 7.18 m/s² (NG) and a subject 2 was 5.07 (G) and 5.62 m/s² (NG). ahv of a subject 1 measured from the left hand was 4.33 (G) and 5.14 m/s² (NG) and a subject 2 was 3.46 (G) and 4.54 m/s² (NG). Percent difference between G and NG was ranged from 10 to 31 when using a weed eater. The largest acceleration single-axis value, awi, on a weed eater was obtained from the x-axis and y-axis for the right hand and left hand, respectively.
For a blower, ahv of a subject 1 measured from the right hand was 2.00 (G) and 2.25 m/s² (NG) and a subject 2 was 1.10 (G) and 1.19 m/s² (NG). ahv of a subject 1 measured from the left hand was 0.10 (G) and 0.09 m/s² (NG) and a subject 2 was 0.10 (G) and 0.11 m/s² (NG). Percent difference between G and NG was ranged from 8 to 13 when using a blower. The largest awi on a blower was obtained from the y-axis for both right and left hand.
Overall, a decrease in vibration magnitude (i.e., ahv) was observed when the cowhide leather safety gloves were worn. Operation of a weed eater resulted in higher ahv than a backpack blower. ahv of the right hand were higher than the left hand most likely due to the tool design and operator technique. The subject 2 (i.e., tool operator 2) tended to have lower ahv than the subject 1 possibly due to the subject 1's stronger hand force. Dominant single-axis exposure on a blower was the y-axis while the x- and y-axis were dominant on a weed eater, mainly due to the handle axial direction.
Conclusion
This study showed the protective effect of the general-purpose leather work gloves when operating a weed eater and backpack blower. Use of the safety gloves is recommended especially when operating a weed eater even though they are not anti-vibration gloves. More investigations are needed to examine the effect of different types of gloves on the HAV levels as well as the effect of different types of power tools.
Primary Topic:
Protective Clothing and Equipment/Respiratory Protection
Secondary Topics:
Ergonomics