RESEARCH PAPER
Occupational risks related to vibrations using a brush cutter for green area management
1
Dipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi Mediterranea di Reggio Calabria, Italy
2
Division of Agricultural Engineering, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria
Corresponding author
Bruno Bernardi
Dipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi Mediterranea di Reggio Calabria, Italy
Dipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi Mediterranea di Reggio Calabria, Italy
Souraya Benalia
Università degli Studi Mediterranea di Reggio Calabria - Dipartimento di Agraria, Località Feo di Vito, 89122 Reggio Calabria, Italy
Università degli Studi Mediterranea di Reggio Calabria - Dipartimento di Agraria, Località Feo di Vito, 89122 Reggio Calabria, Italy
Ann Agric Environ Med. 2018;25(2):255-258
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
Exposure to physical hazards associated with the use of machinery in agriculture and forestry: noise, vibration, dustPrevention of occupational diseases in agriculture, forestry, food industry and wood industryWork-related accidents and injuries in agriculture, forestry, food industry and wood industry: incidence, causes, social aspects and prevention
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Weed control is one of the most important issues in the maintenance sectors of both agriculture and green areas. Small tools are employed for controlling grass and other growths on steep verges and river banks. This leads the operators being exposed to many risks among which vibration is one. The purpose of this study is to measure and evaluate hand-arm vibration and to verify the daily exposure to which workers are often subjected while weeding.
Material and methods:
Two cutting heads, a brush knife and a mowing head were compared. Both were mounted on the same cow-horn brush cutter. The vibration total value was expressed as the root-mean-square (rms) of three component values according to the axes X, Y and Z. The signal was frequency weighted using the weighting curve Wh, as described in the ISO 5349–1 (2001) standard. In addition, the daily vibration exposure was calculated and compared with the thresholds set by EU Directive 2002/44/EC (2005).
Results:
The obtained results showed that the exposure action value (EAV) of 2.5 ms-2 was exceeded while using both cutting heads. The exposure limit value (ELV) using the brush knife also exceeded 5 ms-2.
Conclusions:
The results highlighted important aspects in terms of exposure values that should be considered with the view of preventing the risk of Hand-Arm Vibration Syndrome (HAVS) to which the operators who frequently use these tools are exposed. Specific measures should therefore be taken to protect the exposed workers.
Weed control is one of the most important issues in the maintenance sectors of both agriculture and green areas. Small tools are employed for controlling grass and other growths on steep verges and river banks. This leads the operators being exposed to many risks among which vibration is one. The purpose of this study is to measure and evaluate hand-arm vibration and to verify the daily exposure to which workers are often subjected while weeding.
Material and methods:
Two cutting heads, a brush knife and a mowing head were compared. Both were mounted on the same cow-horn brush cutter. The vibration total value was expressed as the root-mean-square (rms) of three component values according to the axes X, Y and Z. The signal was frequency weighted using the weighting curve Wh, as described in the ISO 5349–1 (2001) standard. In addition, the daily vibration exposure was calculated and compared with the thresholds set by EU Directive 2002/44/EC (2005).
Results:
The obtained results showed that the exposure action value (EAV) of 2.5 ms-2 was exceeded while using both cutting heads. The exposure limit value (ELV) using the brush knife also exceeded 5 ms-2.
Conclusions:
The results highlighted important aspects in terms of exposure values that should be considered with the view of preventing the risk of Hand-Arm Vibration Syndrome (HAVS) to which the operators who frequently use these tools are exposed. Specific measures should therefore be taken to protect the exposed workers.
REFERENCES (23)
1.
Ahmad MT, Tang L, Steward BL. Automated Mechanical Weeding. In: Young SL, Pierce FJ, editors. Automation: The Future of Weed Control in Cropping Systems. Springer N. 2014. p. 125–37.
2.
Pannacci E, Tei F. Effects of mechanical and chemical methods on weed control, weed seed rain and crop yield in maize, sunflower and soyabean. Crop Prot. 2014; 64: 51–9.
3.
Peruzzi A, Ginanni M, Fontanelli M, Raffaelli M, Bàrberi P. Innovative strategies for on-farm weed management in organic carrot. Renew Agric Food Syst. 2007; 22: 246–59.
4.
Cividino SRS, Colantoni A, Vello M, Dell’Antonia D, Malev O, Gubiani R. Risk analysis of agricultural, forestry and green maintenance working sites. Contemp Eng Sci. 2015; 8: 1257–66.
5.
Monarca D, Cecchini M, Guerrieri M, Santi M, Bedini R, Colantoni A. Safety and health of workers: Exposure to dust, noise and vibrations. Acta Hortic. 2009; 845: 437–42.
6.
Okubo N, Nakagawa H, Furuya K, Toi T. Vibration Reduction of Brush Cutter. In Proceedings of the 31st IMAC, A Conference on Structural Dynamics. Springer. 45; 2013. p. 377–87.
7.
Uemura M, Yoshida J, Miyakawa S, Oono T, Ishikawa D. Vibration reduction of brush cutter considering human response characteristic. In: Inter.noise 2014 43rd International Congress on Noise Control Engineering. 16–19 Novembre, Melbourne Australia; 2014. p. 1–9.
8.
Yoshida J, Uemura M, Miyakawa S, Oono T, Ishikawa D. Reduction of High Frequency Vibration of Brush Cutter by Structure Optimization. In: Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering. London, U.K.; 2013. p. 5–9.
9.
Cerruto E, Manetto G, Schillaci G. Vibration produced by hand-held olive electrical harvesters. J Agric Eng. 2012; 43: 79–85.
10.
Deboli R, Calvo A, Preti C, Inserillo M. Design and test of a device for acceleration reproducibility of hand held olive harvesters. Int J Ind Ergon. 2014; 44: 581–9.
11.
ISO 8041:2005 Human response to vibration – Measuring instrumentation. International Standard Organization, Geneva.
12.
Ainsa I, Gonzalez D, Lizaranzu M, Bernad C. Experimental evaluation of uncertainty in hand–arm vibration measurements. Int J Ind Ergon. 2011; 41: 167–79.
13.
EN ISO DIS 20643/A1:2012. Mechanical vibration – Hand-held and hand-guided machinery – Principles for evaluation of vibration emission – Accelerometer positions. European Commitee for Standardization, 2012.
14.
ISO 5349-1:2001 – Mechanical vibration – Measurement and evaluation of human exposure to hand-transmitted vibration – Part 1: General requirements. 2001. International Standard Organization, Geneva.
15.
Ko YH, Ean OL, Ripin ZM. The design and development of suspended handles for reducing hand-arm vibration in petrol driven grass trimmer. Int J Ind Ergon. 2011; 41: 459–70.
16.
European Parliament and the Counsil of the European. Directive 2002/44/EC on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of worker to the risk arising from physical agents (vibration). Off J Eur Union. 2005; 191.
17.
R Core Team (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org/.
18.
Hao KY, Ripin ZM. Nodal control of grass trimmer handle vibration. Int J Ind Ergon. 2013; 43: 18–30.
19.
Allsop D, Smith J, Strayner R, Trafford J. Handle vibration of grass-cutting machines (strimmers) Can a simple standard test indicate exposure of operators to hand-transmitted vibration? In: UK Group Meeting on Human Responses to Vibration. 2000. p. 123–8.
20.
BS EN ISO 11806:2008 Agricultural and forestry machinery. Portable hand-held combustion engine driven brush cutters and grass trimmers. Safety. 2008. International Standard Organization, Geneva.
21.
ISO 7916, 1989. Forestry Machinery- Portable Brush-saws- Measurement of Hand- transmitted Vibration. International Standard Organization, Geneva.
22.
Callea P, Zimbalatti G, Quendler E, Nimmerichter A, Bachl N, Bernardi B, et al. Occupational illnesses related to physical strains in apple harvesting. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2014 Jan; 21: 407–11.
23.
Tudor AH. Hand-arm vibration: Product design principles. J Safety Res. 1996; 27: 157–62.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1898-2263 |
| ISSN: | 1232-1966 |
Improvement of visual identification of the journal - task financed under the agreement No. 618/P-DUN/2019 by the Minister of Science and Higher Education allocated to the activities of disseminating science.
Generation of the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) - task financed under the agreement No. 618/P-DUN/2019 by the Minister of Science and Higher
© 2006-2024 Journal hosting platform by Bentus
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
