Development of a Dynapod for Occupational Activities in Agriculture

P. S. Tiwari; M. M. Pandey; L. P. Gite; A. K. Shrivastava

doi:10.52151/jae2014514.1564

Authors

P. S. Tiwari AICRP on Ergonomics and Safety in Agriculture, CIAE, Bhopal Author
M. M. Pandey Ex-DDG (Engg.), ICAR, New Delhi, Author
L. P. Gite AICRP on Ergonomics and Safety in Agriculture, CIAE, Bhopal Author
A. K. Shrivastava Department of Farm Machinery and Power Engineering, College of Agricultural Engineering, JNKVV, Jabalpur. Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.52151/jae2014514.1564

Keywords:

Dynapod, pedal power, occupational activities, agriculture

Abstract

A dynapod is a pedalling device that may be used as an interface between a human worker and any rotary machine for utilization of human muscle power in efficient manner. A study was conducted at CIAE, Bhopal to optimize the major design parameters such as power output, pedalling rate, saddle height and crank length for the design of a dynapod. Based on the study conducted on a bicycle ergo-meter for measurement of physiological and psychophysical responses, anthropometric data of male Indian agricultural workers and biomechanical consideration during pedalling, a dynapod was designed and developed. This paper presents the design details of the dynapod.

References

Agrawal K N; Singh R K P; Satpathy K K. 2009. Isometric strength of agricultural workers of Meghalaya: A case study of Indian population. Int. J. Ind. Ergon., 39(6), 919-923.

Devangan K N; Gogoi G; Owary C; Gorate D U. 2010. Isometric muscle strength of male agricultural workers of India and the design of tractor controls. Int. J. Ind. Ergon., 40(5), 484-491.

Dickinson S. 1929. The efficiency of bicycle pedalling as affected by speed and load. J. Physiol., 67 (3): 242-255.

Gaesser G A; Brooks G A. 1975. Muscular efficiency during steady state exercise: effects of speed and work rate. J. Appl. Physiol.,38(6), 1132-1139.

Garry R C;Wishart G M. 1931. On the existence of a most efficient speed in bicycle pedalling and the problem of determining human muscular efficiency. J. Physiol.,72, 425-437.

Heil D P; Wilcox A R; Quinn C M. 1995. Cardiorespiratory responses to seat-tube angle variation during steady state cycling. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.,27(5), 730-735.

Price D; Donne B. 1997. Effect of variation in seat tube angle at different seat heights on submaximal cycling performance in men. J. Sports Sci., 15(4), 395-402.

Shah N. 2005. Integrating village-industry with human and animal power. Rural Technology, Centre for Technology Alternatives for Rural Areas (CTARA), Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay.

Shephard R J. 1967. Physiological determinants of cardiorespiratory fitness.J. Sports Med. Phy. Fit.,7, 111-134.

Shephard R J. 1997. What is the optimal type of physical activity to enhance health? Br. J. Sports Med., 31(4), 277-284.

Sial J K; Amjad M; Shafi A; Khan M A. 2005. Development of deep well jet pump for orchards. Pak. J. Water Resour., 9(1), 35-39.

Tiwari PS; Gite L P; Pandey M M; Shrivastava A K. 2011. Pedal power for occupational activities: effect of power output and pedaling rate on physiological responses.Int. J. Ind. Ergon.,41, 261-267.

Tiwari PS. 2012. Pedal Power for Occupational Activities: Designing a Dynapod. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing GmbH & Co. KG, Heinrich-Böcking-Str. 6-8, 66121 Saarbrücken, Germany. ISBN: 978-3-8484-0491-9, pp: 133.

Tiwari P S; Pandey M M; Gite L P; Shrivastava A K. 2014. An ergonomic intervention in operation of a rotary maize sheller. Indian J. Agric. Sci., 84(7), 791-5.

Tiwari P S; Potdar R R; Gite L P. 2014. Drudgery reduction in operation of cleaner-cum-grader: an ergonomic intervention. Humanizing Work and Work Environment, Ergo-Safety for All.In: Proc. of International Ergonomics Conference, HWWE 2013, GBPUA&T, Pantnagar. Daya Publishimg House, 408-415.

Wilson G D. 1986. Understanding pedal power. Volunteers in Technical Assistance, Virginia, USA.

Yadav B G; Singh Guman P K; Patnaik B; Hota M D. 1979. Comparative study of power application modes in threshing paddy for operator’s comfort. J. Agric. Eng., 15(2), 69-73.