Raziel Riemer

Digital human modeling software uses biomechanical models to compute workers' risk of injury during industrial work processes. In many cases, the biomechanics are calculated using quasistatic models, which neglect the body's dynamics and therefore might be erroneous. This study investigated the differential effect of using a dynamic vs. a quasistatic model on spinal loading during combined manual material handling tasks that are prevalent in industry. An experiment was conducted involving nine male and nine female participants performing a total of 3402 cycles of a box-conveying task (removing, carrying and depositing) for different box masses and shelf heights. Using motion capture data, the peak and cumulative moments acting on the L5/S1 joint were calculated using 3D dynamic and quasistatic models. This revealed that neglecting the dynamic movements (i.e., using a quasistatic model) results in an on average underestimation of 19.7% in the peak spinal moment and 3.6% in the cumulative moment that in some cases exceeds the maximal limit for the compression forces acting on the lower back.