NOTE: This document is provided for historical purposes only.
Presentation by Robert Radwin, University of Wisconsin
DR. PEACOCK: Rob Radwin is a Professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. He is on the faculty of the Department of Industrial Engineering and he is the Director of the Biomedical Engineering Program. He conducts research and teaches in the areas and ergonomics and human factors engineering. He got his Ph.D. from the University of Michigan in industrial engineering and was a post-doctor of research fellow at the Center for Ergonomics. He is the recipient of the Presidential Young Investigator Award from the National Science Foundation.
He actively studies the recognition, causes and control of CTD's in manual work. His research is concerned with developing measurement and analytic methods for assessing exposure for physical stress in the workplace. He also has two university industrial consortia, one of them related to hand tools and the other with ergonomics analysis and design. In recent years, he's contributed a tremendous amount to the Human Factors Society and the ergonomics profession in general.
DR. RADWIN: Thank you, Brian. This is a little different than any technical presentation I've given because I'm going to talk about how industry can use universities in the design of products. Jim McGlothlin asked me to say a little about the process of design and the involvement of universities. I've heard it said many times before that if you ask a university researcher a question, they'll go back to their lab, do an experiment then come back and tell you they need more data. And then they'll ask you more questions rather than answer your original question. I'm hoping to dispel some of those myths with this talk today.
I'm at the College of Engineering at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. In engineering, we're engaged in a great deal of design, and we train engineers who go off to industry and do design. In U.S. engineering colleges today, statistics show that about 3.3 billion dollars are used per year in funded research. This is data by the National Science Foundation, and of that 3.3 billion dollars, only 60 percent of that research is supported by the U.S. Government. That includes agencies like the National Institutes for Health, The National Science Foundation, The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and other government agencies.
Of the remaining 40 percent, according to Science Magazine '95, it is reported that 16 percent of the research is funded by and for industry. That sums up to something over a half billion dollars per year in research that's being used by industry and being conducted for industry. Industry\ university partnerships are increasing more and more, and I believe this is going to become the common model.
First, let me say something about working with universities and then I'll give some examples of designing new products with universities. I must say that there are very fine universities engaged in ergonomics today. There are a number of people here at this conference who are scheduled speakers or attending the conference from universities and who are doing a great deal of ergonomics research and working in the area of design. There are also many companies here who do, in fact, work with universities in the design process.
One good reason to work with universities is because some of the best people in the field of ergonomics are at the universities. They are at the forefront of knowledge in ergonomics, and this new knowledge can go directly into the design of new products offered by manufacturers. Universities are very good at doing novel things, and are very good at generating new knowledge. The benefits of working with universities in the design process, then, is to explore new areas of product design, to generate new knowledge, and to investigate novel problems.
Another reason to use universities is that university research involves bright, energetic students to work on problems for industry. And many of them will end up working in your industry as an employee, and they will become intimately familiar with your company and your products. Another benefit that many companies find in working with universities is that universities do peer reviewed objective research, and that peer reviewed research is recognized for its integrity. This is valuable for marketing for other reasons that justify product designs.
Finally, universities have some of the most advanced laboratories and resources. Industry cannot usually invest in these types of resources because of the expense and the inability to maintain these types of laboratories. In general, a university laboratory is very different than the kinds of laboratories you find in industry. At least that's my experience. So let me describe some examples of some of the kinds of things I'm talking about.
The first example is a study that we did with a manufacturer of construction vehicles. In this study, we were interested in understanding how to design controllers and steering wheels that are used for operating large construction vehicles. These tools are products, but they also serve as the workplace for many construction workers. In this case the vehicle cab is the workplace. And so, ergonomic design of products, as Brian pointed out, often involves industrial products.
The concern in this case was the understanding of designing cabs with the minimization of factors that reduced the risk of musculoskeletal disorders. Our lab developed equipment and procedures that most industrial laboratories do not have, and this involves the ability to synchronize very complex events with signals that are recorded from goniometers that measure angles on the wrist and joints, and from EMG electrodes or sensors for measuring force in the hands. We can encode that data directly into video tape for analysis of very complex activities like performing construction tasks with a large vehicle.
These are some of the sensors that we've been working with on in our lab for measuring the forces in the hands. We developed equipment and software for using multimedia computer technology to extract biomechanical data encoded on the tape for job analysis, but I won't go into all the details of how this methodology works.
What it allows us to do is to observe complex behavior or complex activities like working in a factory or working in the cab of a construction vehicle, and extract bio-mechanical data. In doing this, we are able to quantify force and motion. In the case of the cab, the motions and the forces are exerted when driving a wheel loader.
We studied a number of different types of control systems and vehicles in order to understand how the operation of these vehicles relate to repetition, force and posture. These are the factors that we are concerned with when we want to design equipment to prevent musculoskeletal disorders. We placed goniometers on various joints, the hand and the wrist, the forearm and the shoulder; and we used EMG electrodes because we were concerned with muscle contraction in this study.
We were able to advise the manufacturer about the design conditions that minimize physical stress factors, depending on the kind of job the operator performs. This was research but the outcome was design recommendations and parameters for specific control systems.
We used the same technology for the design of a workplace in a much different environment. It was a hardware manufacturing plant. Here, we were helping locate hanging hooks for painting various shape products as well as learning how this job could be designed to minimize repetition and awkward postures.
Another example is the design of power hand tools. We've worked with a number of hand tool manufacturers. One manufacturer told us they wanted to design a better tool, and they wanted to understand if certain features had ergonomic benefits in order to minimize exertions in the hands. One thing they were interested in was the trigger shape. This trigger was a single finger trigger, and this trigger was a multiple finger trigger.
When they searched the literature, nothing indicated the advantages and disadvantages of these triggers in terms of the force exerted by each finger. Another thing they wanted to do in their design was to make the handle of the power tool adjustable. This was a very unique idea, but they had no way of really knowing if there was an advantage in doing this. Intuitively, it made sense, but there was no data to support it.
So we designed a study, and our study looked at these factors from a very generic scientific standpoint. But in doing this study, we were able to provide very specific design parameters and factors for the design of these new products. In this case, we took a tool that was an in-line nut runner. Since we wanted to design a pistol grip nut runner, we had the company modify the tool so that it had the torque and power parameters of a pistol grip tool and we attached a handle to in-line tool.
Because we were working with the manufacturer, they were able to provide us with such an in-line power tool. We attached handles to this tool that had strange gauge force sensors that allowed us to measure the forces in the fingers and the palm. I won't go into all the details of how we did this, but we had a working prototype of a new tool that didn't exist for testing using actual operators.
We also worked with the industrial designers. They had certain constraints about the size of the handle. In our experiment, the industrial designers built plastic caps for our sensors that were shaped into the design that they were anticipating. All the parameters for our experiment were directly related to the product that was being designed, but we actually looked at some very new scientific questions.
This is a picture of the prototype that we used. It doesn't look very pretty, but it gave us the data we needed. Working with the target customer industry, we went to an auto assembly plant, found subjects for our experiment who used tools that were very similar to our product prototype. In doing this, we were able to provide some very specific parameters about the eventual design of this product. This company won an IDEA design award in "Business Week" for the final design of the product.
I'll show you some other examples. This was an investigation into some very specific factors for the design of the key switch in a computer keyboard. In this experiment, we studied the force displacement parameters of the spring element in the key. We were able to provide very specific design parameters to help minimize the forces in keying. This was sponsored by the Office of Ergonomics Research Committee which is a consortium of a number of computer companies and affiliated industries.
Another study involved a company that was also designing a computer-related product. This was for people with disabilities as a substitute for the computer mouse. The company wanted to design a device that could be worn on the head using infrared technology that would allow a person with cerebral palsy or another movement disability to use their head to locate the cursor on the computer screen of a graphical user interface.
They had the knowledge of how to design and build this, but they didn't have an understanding of what specific parameters they needed. The gain parameters, the motion of the head versus the motion on the screen, would have to be optimized for their design. We conducted experiments using prototypes of this product in order to design the software that drives this product. Again, this is an example of working with the company in designing a new product.
Another mechanism that's worked for us with industry is the use of university-industry consortia. This is a partnership between the university and company. It brings together the engineers and designers in the company with university researchers. Often products that are manufactured or being designed are worked into on-going research projects. Sometimes new research projects are created around that design, but the objective is to transfer technology, and to share expertise between the university researchers and the industry designers and engineers.
A benefit is that the companies can influence the research that universities perform in specific ways that help them benefit from specific ergonomic information. This is a list of some of the benefits of these consortia, and each of these consortia are different. The consortium we have at the University of Wisconsin deals with the design and use of industrial tools, hand tools and power tools.
We work with more than 12 manufacturers of hand tools to help them understand the latest information on ergonomics and also work with them in designing new and better tools for the prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders.
Let me say a few things about working with the university. Many people believe that university researchers are up in some ivory tower working outside of the real world. Well, this is changing, and many university researchers do in fact work in the real world with industry. I hope I've shown you some examples, and that they have a great appreciation for the problems and the needs of industry. As government funding sources shrink, there's a much greater interest in the university to work and to partner with industry. One thing to keep in mind is that students benefit from the experience. But because it is a learning experience, industry needs to understand that sometimes the time limitations of getting a Masters degree or a Ph.D. are longer than their time constraints.
There are ways to deal with some of these constraints. University laboratories aren't job shops. Many people come to universities to do very specific things, and there are ways of working with universities to do that. One way is to have milestones established to produce very specific outcomes on the way to accomplishing novel research. I'll show you some examples of how we deal with that situation.
Consider that when working with universities, the time frame is longer and milestones and specific deliverables should be established at certain stages in the research. Establishing these at the onset of the project, makes it possible for industry to get some quick and dirty information. Then the university can proceed with not just a quick investigation but go on to produce new knowledge and to understand in-depth some of the factors and considerations that are being studied.
One other thing to keep in mind is the "publish or perish syndrome." Universities exist for the generation of new knowledge, and the way that new knowledge in science progresses is through the publication of information. Working with universities on the specific time lines for publications is important. There's a value to publishing the research that's done with universities because it validates the design features, and it provides recognition for the scientific validity of the design factors and parameters. It also indicates that, in fact, the product really has something new.
In summary, I'll list some of these. They'll be available in the proceedings. One key is to expand very specific problems into general scientific areas of inquiry. And in doing so, plan milestones so that universities can produce the deliverables that are needed by industry, while at the same time doing research, identifying at the onset what information is proprietary and establishing time periods for publication.
Anticipate failures as well as well as success. The reason I say that is because universities work on new problems and things that have never been studies before. Sometimes the outcome is different than what one might anticipate. Consider those failures as new knowledge gained to best use that information in the production of new products. Thank you.
