Number of co-authors:3
Number of publications with 3 favourite co-authors:Sean Gallagher:6Mark S. Redfern:2Arnold C. Love:2
Christopher A. Hamrick's 3 most productive colleagues in number of publications:Sean Gallagher:16Mark S. Redfern:10Arnold C. Love:3
User error: replace user and press any key to continue.
-- Popular computer one-liner
Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann
Read Steve's chapter !
Christopher A. Hamrick
Publications by Christopher A. Hamrick (bibliography)
Gallagher, Sean, Hamrick, Christopher A. and Redfern, Mark S. (1993): The Effects of Posture and Technique on Forces Experienced when Hanging Continuous Miner Cable. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37th Annual Meeting 1993. pp. 779-783.
Analysis of lost-time back injuries in underground coal mines indicates that handling continuous miner cable places workers at high risk of injury. Manual hanging of this type of cable is a common lifting task in underground mines. This study was performed to assess the ground reaction forces associated with hanging cable in various postures and employing different methods of securing the cable. Seven experienced coal miners (mean age: 41.4 years +/- 2.1) performed a series of 12 cable hanging tasks. Independent variables included a set of six posture/vertical space constraint conditions (LIFTCOND), and two techniques of securing the cable to the ceiling (METHOD). The dependent variables consisted of ground reaction forces measured using two force plates. LIFTCOND (F(5,66) = 21.31, p < 0.0001) and METHOD (F(1,66) = 10.89, p < 0.005) both significantly affected the magnitude of the peak resultant forces generated during the tasks. Post hoc analysis indicated that kneeling postures resulted in significantly lower forces than stooping for the same ceiling heights. Greater forces were associated with higher lifting conditions, attributable in part to the fact that higher lifts require more cable to be hoisted. Forces were also increased when subjects twisted baling wire to secure the cable, as compared to hanging it on a hook. An interaction between LIFTCOND and METHOD was identified with lateral shear forces -- stooping conditions where the subjects twisted the cable with wire resulted in higher lateral shear forces. Results of this study will be used to develop recommendations to reduce back injury risk when handling cable.
© All rights reserved Gallagher et al. and/or Human Factors Society
Hamrick, Christopher A., Gallagher, Sean and Redfern, Mark S. (1993): Ground Reaction Forces during Miner Cable Pulling Tasks. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37th Annual Meeting 1993. pp. 784-788.
The handling of mining machine cables in underground coal mines has been identified as a particularly stressful task and is a likely contributor to low back pain. In this experiment, seven experienced miners performed a cable pulling task while ground reaction forces and cable tension were measured. The independent variables were two levels of cable resistance (low and high) and lifting conditions (kneeling under a 1.2 meter [48 inch] roof, stooping under a 1.2 meter [48 inch] roof, stooping under a 1.5 meter [60 inch] roof, and unrestricted standing). The dependent variables were the peak values of the following: actual tension measured in the cable, ground reaction forces in the X (anterior), Y (lateral), and Z (vertical) directions and the magnitude of the resultant force vector. Work posture significantly affected the peak ground reaction forces in the Y-direction. The Y-forces were highest in the kneeling condition, indicating that there is less postural stability when performing cable pulling tasks in a kneeling posture. Thus, there may be a greater likelihood of injury in this posture. Additionally, biomechanical stresses which contribute to musculoskeletal injury may be greater in the kneeling posture.
© All rights reserved Hamrick et al. and/or Human Factors Society
Gallagher, Sean and Hamrick, Christopher A. (1992): Maximum Acceptable Weights of Lift for Common Coal Mine Supply Items. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting 1992. pp. 654-658.
A series of psychophysical lifting studies was conducted to establish maximum acceptable weights of lift (MAWL) for three supply items commonly handled in underground coal mines (rock dust bags, ventilation stopping blocks, and crib blocks). Each study utilized 12 subjects, all of whom had considerable experience working in underground coal mines. Effects of lifting in four postures (standing, stooping under a 1.5 m ceiling, stooping under a 1.2 m ceiling, and kneeling) were investigated together with four lifting conditions (combinations of lifting symmetry and lifting height). The frequency of lifting was set at 4 per minute, and the task duration was 15 minutes. Posture significantly affected the MAWL for the rock dust bag (standing MAWL was 7% greater than restricted postures and kneeling MAWL was 6.4% less than stooped); however, posture interacted with lifting conditions for both of the other materials. Physiological costs were found to be significantly greater in the stooped postures compared to kneeling for all materials. Other contrasts (standing versus restricted postures, stooping under 1.5 m ceiling versus stooping under 1.2 m ceiling) did not exhibit significantly different levels of energy expenditure. Energy expenditure was significantly affected by vertical lifting height; however, the plane of lifting had little influence on metabolic cost. Recommended acceptable workloads for the three materials are 20.0 kg for the rock dust bag, 16.5 kg for the ventilation stopping block, and 14.7 kg for the crib block. These results suggest that miners are often required to lift supplies that are substantially heavier than psychophysically acceptable lifting limits.
© All rights reserved Gallagher and Hamrick and/or Human Factors Society
Hamrick, Christopher A. and Gallagher, Sean (1992): The Effects of Lifting Posture on Trunk Muscle Activity. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting 1992. pp. 742-746.
Trunk muscle activity of twelve healthy males with coal mining experience was examined while each subject lifted a box under various conditions. The independent variables were four levels of posture (kneeling, stooped under a 1.2 m roof, stooped under a 1.6 m roof, and standing), height to which the box was lifted (35 cm or 70 cm), and weight of the lifting box (15 kg, 20 kg, or 25 kg). The dependent variables were the peak EMG values recorded during a lift for each of eight trunk muscles (left and right erectores spinae, left and right latissimus dorsi, left and right external oblique, and left and right rectus abdominis). Posture and weight of lift significantly affected peak activity of the left and right erectores spinae, the left and right latissimus dorsi muscles, and the right external oblique muscle. The latissimus dorsi muscle activity was highest in the low stooping posture, and was lowest in the kneeling posture, while erectores spinae activity was highest in the kneeling posture and decreased as the trunk became more flexed. Thus, the muscle activity during lifting tasks is affected by restricting a worker's posture. Consequently, many lifting guidelines and recommendations currently, in use may not be directly applicable to work being performed in restricted postures.
© All rights reserved Hamrick and Gallagher and/or Human Factors Society
Hamrick, Christopher A., Gallagher, Sean and Love, Arnold C. (1990): Regression Modeling of Spinal Forces During Constrained Lifting Postures. In: D., Woods, and E., Roth, (eds.) Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 34th Annual Meeting 1990, Santa Monica, USA. pp. 669-673.
Gallagher, Sean, Hamrick, Christopher A. and Love, Arnold C. (1990): Biomechanical Modeling of Asymmetric Lifting Tasks in Constrained Lifting Postures. In: D., Woods, and E., Roth, (eds.) Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 34th Annual Meeting 1990, Santa Monica, USA. pp. 702-706.
Show this list on your homepage
Join the technology elite and advance:
Changes to this page (author)26 Feb 2010: Modified26 Jun 2007: Added
26 Jun 2007: Added
26 Jun 2007: Added
26 Jun 2007: Added
26 Jun 2007: Added
26 Jun 2007: Added
Page maintainer: The Editorial Team