Zhu Z X, Zhang Z J
Department of Psychology, University of Hangzhou, Zhejiang, People's Republic of China.
Ergonomics. 1990 Jul;33(7):875-84. doi: 10.1080/00140139008925295.
This study used psychophysical methods to determine the acceptable mean maximum lifting workload for eight Chinese young male subjects, and examined the effects of lifting technique (including freestyle, stoop and squat), lifting frequency (including 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 lifts/min) and physical characteristics on the maximum acceptable workload. The results are described as follows: (1) The maximum acceptable weights selected by subjects varied from 11.34 to 18.33 kg with changes in lifting technique and frequency. These data were lower than those previously obtained; (2) The upper limit of physiological tolerance over an 8 h workday was also generally lower than previously suggested. However, this upper limit varied with changes in lifting technique and frequency, and in some circumstances it was the same as or even higher than previous limit; (3) Lifting efficiency was affected significantly by technique and frequency. The rank order of efficiency for three lifting techniques were freestyle, stoop and squat. Efficiency was greatest when lifting frequency was between 5 and 6 lifts/min; and (4) The correlations between the maximum acceptable workloads selected by subjects and anthropometric sizes were significant, but those between maximum acceptable workload and isometric strength were not.
本研究采用心理物理学方法确定了八名中国青年男性受试者可接受的平均最大举重工作量,并研究了举重技术(包括自由式、弯腰式和蹲式)、举重频率(包括每分钟2次、3次、4次、5次和6次举重)以及身体特征对最大可接受工作量的影响。结果如下:(1)随着举重技术和频率的变化,受试者选择的最大可接受重量在11.34至18.33千克之间变化。这些数据低于先前获得的数据;(2)8小时工作日的生理耐受上限通常也低于先前建议的数值。然而,该上限随举重技术和频率的变化而变化,在某些情况下与先前的上限相同甚至更高;(3)举重效率受技术和频率的显著影响。三种举重技术的效率排序为自由式、弯腰式和蹲式。当举重频率在每分钟5至6次之间时效率最高;(4)受试者选择的最大可接受工作量与人体测量尺寸之间的相关性显著,但最大可接受工作量与等长力量之间的相关性不显著。