Ergonomic Evaluation of Hand Operated Maize Shellers
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52151/jae2006434.1229Abstract
Three types of hand operated maize shellers were evaluated ergonomically. The performance in respect of cardiac cost, overall tiredness, body part discomfort and output were evaluated. The heart rate while working with all maize shellers indicates moderate workload on the subjects. The overall discomfort score varied from 3.5 to 4 i.e. 'more than light discomfort' and body part discomfort score was 51 for all the maize shellers. The highest output was observed with maize sheller having serrated tins than other two maize shellers. Also the use of this maize sheller could help to reduce the drudgery by 18.75 and 45.13 %than tubular and octagonal shaped maize shellers respectively having plain fins, as calculated from the heart rate data.
Downloads
References
Anonymous. 2003-04. Indian Council of Agricultural Research Ad-hoc Project on 'Reducing Drudgery of Farm Women Through Use of Improved Agricultural Equipments for Dominant Cropping Systems in Marathwada Region', College of Agricultural Engineering, Marathwada Agricultural University, Parbhani.
Agricultural Statistics at a Glance. 2004. Agricultural Statistics Division, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agricuiture, Government of India, New Delhi.
Ali Yusuf; Singh Jabar; Soni A K; Maheshwari A K. 1986. Economic and technical feasibility of maize dehusking and shell ing. J. Agric. Engng., 23 (1), 71-81.
Agrawal K N, Singh R K P; Satapatthy K K. 2004. Ergonomical evaluation of plastic covered maize shellers. Paper presented in XXXVIII Annual Convention of ISAE, held at Dr. BSKKV, Dapoli.
Astrand P 0; Rodalh K. 1977. Textbook of work physiology - Physiological bases of exercise. McGraw Hill Book Co., New York.
Corlett EN; Bishop R P. 1976.A technique for assessing postural discomfort. Ergonomics, 19 (2), 175-182.
Gite L P; Agrawal N. 2000. National Research Centre for Women in Agriculture, CIAE, Bhopal sub centre. Progress Report. Central Institute of Agricultural Engineering, Bhopal.
Gite L P; Yadav B G. 1982. Ergonomics in testing of farm equipments. Paper presented in the XIX annual convention of the Indian Society of Agricultural Engineers, Udaipur, India.
Gopalan S; Ananthram S E. 1970. Ideal maize sheller for small and medium farms. Indian Farming, 19, 11.
Ghugare B D; Adhaoo S H; Gite L P; Pandya A C;Patel S L. 1991. Ergonomics evaluation of a level operated knapsack sprayer. Applied Ergonomics, 22 (4), 241 - 250.
Karunanidhi R; Tajuddin A. 2003. Physiological response of agricultural workers in rice farming operations. J. Agric. Engng., 40 (1), 33-40.
Le Blanc J A. 1957. Use of HR as an index of workload. J. Applied Physiology, 38, 275-280.
Nag P K; Sabastian N C; Mavlankar M G. 1980. Occupational workload of Indian agricultural workers. Ergonomics, 23 (2), 91 - 102.
Nag P K; Nag A. 2004. Drudgery, accidents and injuries in Indian agriculture. Industrial Health, 42, 149-162.
Saha PN; Datta S R; Banerjee PK; Narayanee G G. 1979. An acceptable workload for Indian workers. Ergonomics, 22 (9), 1059-1071.
Singh S P; Gite L P; Agrawal N. 2004. Ergonomical evaluation of manually operated fertilizer broadcaster with farm women. J. Agric. Engg., 41(3), 22-25.
Suggs C W; Splinter W E. 1961. Effect of environment on the allowable workload of man. Trans. ASAE, 4, 4851.
