Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect Procedia Engineering 150 (2016) 1215 – 1220
International Conference on Industrial Engineering, ICIE 2016
Structural and Circuit Design Solution Arguments of Mine Excavators Ergonomics Management V.S. Velikanov *, E.A. Ilina, N.V. Dyorina Nosov Magnitogorsk State Technical University, Lenin Avenue, 38, Magnitogorsk 455000, The Russian Federation
Abstract In order to meet the challenges of the Russian mining industry such as high depreciation of fixed assets, the reproduction of which was mainly due to the intensive use of imported equipment in recent years; the majority equipment produced in the Russian Federation loses the aggregate value of the imported goods ownership, despite the lower initial cost, etc. The efforts should be focused on the development of the high-tech equipment which requires conducting research and development activities to solve these problems. For the purpose of import substitution, it is necessary to increase the mining machinery production volume for openwork. The creation of mining excavators with large bucket capacity requires design and circuitry solutions arguments, and further ergonomic research. In particular, the design and improvement of processes, methods, activity algorithms of the excavator operator as well as those tools and working conditions that directly affect the parameters of the human activity and conditions in the interests of efficiency and productivity in open cast mining. Successful implementation of applied problems in providing ergonomic mining excavators is impossible without solving the scientific and applied tasks. © 2016 2016The TheAuthors. Authors. Published by Elsevier © Published by Elsevier Ltd. Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of ICIE 2016. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of ICIE 2016 Keywords: Ergonomics; mining excavator; mathematical model; ergonomic indicator; simulation; excavator operator
1. Introduction The development of the mining machinery production market has led to the increase of competition in the mining equipment market. In these circumstances, the relations of producers and consumers of technology are based on the optimization of the ratio of its value and consumer properties. In mining machinery manufacturing there is a
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +7-912-324-0304. E-mail address:
[email protected]
1877-7058 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of ICIE 2016
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2016.07.238
1216
V.S. Velikanov et al. / Procedia Engineering 150 (2016) 1215 – 1220
tendency to the increase of products competitiveness, due to the high rates of scientific-technical progress and innovative technologies. Mining excavators are key aspects in the surface mining operations technology. Their highly productive work directly affects the performance and efficiency of surface mining. Market conditions of mining equipment, including mining excavators, requires systematic ergonomic research with the aim of improving the competitiveness of excavating equipment. The need to improve ergonomics excavators is dictated by the increasing quality requirements, volumes, and price indices of mining. In the conditions of scientific-technical progress the values of the parameters including in the optimization criteria change over time, so the development of new approaches to the definition of excavators ergonomics should be regarded to as a managed process of increasing the excavators efficiency [1, 2]. 2. Thematic justification The mining industry is one of the promising and strategically important sectors of the Russian economy. In accordance with the “Energy strategy of Russia for the period till 2030”, the mining industry must reach a fundamentally new level of development. Mining machinery has the following features: as for its research intensity, complexity, and innovation, mining equipment is not inferior to the military-industrial or space directions; in order to obtain a sample of the equipment, extensive research and development work and testing are required. The real contribution of the mining sector in the Russian economy is connected to mining operations and achieves 50-60%. Therefore, the need for further research and development works aimed at the substantiation of constructive and circuit solutions of mining excavators is dictated by solving some actual problems: x weak development of the Russian mining machinery and increasing dependence of industry on imported technologies and equipment; x physical and moral depreciation of production assets, which in turn defines poor indicators of profitability of the mining sector and labor productivity, large losses in the extraction and raw materials processing, high energy intensity of production (Fig.1).
Fig. 1. Excavator Park Structure.
3. Scholarly importance Conditions, methods, and the man’s labour activity organization change with the development of mining. Improving the ergonomics of the excavator should be considered as a controlled process. The effective functioning
V.S. Velikanov et al. / Procedia Engineering 150 (2016) 1215 – 1220
1217
of the excavator is achieved by a rational distribution of functions in the system “Man-Excavator-Face”. One of the criteria for assessing the effectiveness of mining excavators is based on ergonomics control. 4. A brief review of the literature Issues of technical system humanization, i.e. ergonomics, are paid great attention to. Ergonomics implies four areas, being distinguished by methodical and methodological basis: 1) research – carrying out a complex interdisciplinary research of ways to give man-machine complexes human oriented properties; 2) systemic - data integration of different human Sciences and technology to investigate and give the system “Man-Machine” human oriented properties; 3) practical – participation in the formation of human oriented properties of the newly created specific man-machine complexes being modernized and being in operation, by using results from own research and applied science data; 4) method – the experience synthesis of ergatic systems creation, standardization and the human factor accounting processes harmonization [3]. The diversity and complexity of studying the person labour activity organization requires an integrated approach to solve the task of productivity increase. The systematic approach to the study of human interaction with the machine taking into consideration the environment was considered in works of V.D. Venda [1, 2], A.I. Gubinskii, B.A. Dushkov, G.M. Zarakovskii [3], V.P. Zinchenko [4, 5], A.A. Krylov [6], V.N. Munipov [4, 5], M. Monmolen [7], William Woodson [8]. The definition of the generalized indicator of the ergonomic excavator is based on the works of V.S. Golovin [9], V.P. Zinchenko [4, 5], V.N. Munipov [4, 5]. G. Salvendy [10] and M. Shmid [11] and in accordance with conventional techniques it establishes a comprehensive assessment of the product quality. Studies of functional and positional application of the main and auxiliary tools are based on the works of B.A. Dushkov, V.M. Munipov [4, 5], M. Shmid [11], and other scientists. V.S. Golovin, in his work “The Ergonomics of mining equipment” dealt with ergonomics issues in relation to excavating equipment. The developed techniques allowed measuring vibrations, noise, lighting, microclimate, dust, and visibility. It is established that the ergonomics of mining machinery is an integrated characteristics, which grows out of the following ergonomic properties: manageability, serviceability, adoption, habitability, and workability. Each ergonomic property, in its turn, is determined from the number of the integrated indicators that represent different, but interrelated aspects of these properties. The work also assessed the operator’s work with the aim of improving the mining equipment efficiency by taking into account human possibilities at all stages of its interaction with the machine [9]. V.G. Khusainov, based on generalization, development and deepening the calculation theory of mining excavators ergonomic indicators, confirmed in his research that the low competitiveness of domestic excavators is due to the influence of several factors, among which of determining value has the low level of manageability and serviceability [12]. In the conducted research in order to determine the level of ergonomics (generalized ergonomic indicator) mining excavators, the authors used the expert valuation techniques – these are the methods to organize the work with specialists – experts and expert opinions processing expressed in quantitative and/or qualitative form to generate information for making decision by decision makers. As a rule, the answers of the experts are non-numeric. Images, words, not numbers are used in the human thinking. The expert can compare two objects, give them evaluations like “good”, “acceptable”, “bad”, to sort several objects by attractiveness, but usually he cannot say how many times or how much one object is better than the other. In other words, the answers of the expert are usually measured in ordinal scale, are the rankings, the results of pairwise comparisons and other non-numerical objects, but not numbers. V.G. Khusainov defines the optimization criterion as a generalized ergonomic indicator, which depends on complex parameters to ensure the controllability, habitability, maintainability, adoption with the respective weighting coefficients m1=0,4; m2=0,3; m3=0,25; m4=0,05 [12]. 5. Statement of the problem To date there is no unified classification of research methods and approaches in the definition of ergonomic excavators. The reason is that the classification should cover all areas of ergonomics research. Experience in various
1218
V.S. Velikanov et al. / Procedia Engineering 150 (2016) 1215 – 1220
industries shows that the complex solution of ergonomic technological equipment tasks allows to increase the efficiency of its operation on 10-30 %. Therefore, research in the field of improving crawler mounted mining excavators according to the ergonomics criterion is an important scientific task [13-17]. 6. Mining excavators’ ergonomic analysis According to the data of the literature analysis it was found that the definition of generalized ergonomic indicator is based on two methods – the method of arithmetic mean ranks and median ranks method. The study used a representative measurement theory, which is the basis of the expert assessment theory. The expert assigns a single grade foundations (according to a five-point grading scale) to the ergonomic integrated indicator, which dominates in determining the excavator ergonomics. Accordingly, the grade five is the indicator with the least effect. Complex indices K1, K2, K3, K4, K5 characterize manageability, habitability, serviceability, adoption, and maintainability of the excavator. The final ranking according to the method of arithmetic means is recorded in the form of inequality K1 K 2 K 3 K 4 K 5
(1)
ordering according to the method of median ranks has the form:
K1 K 2 K3 ^ K 4 , K5 `
(2)
The comparison according to the method of arithmetic means and the method of medians (1) and (2) shows their convergence, composite indicators of adoption (K4) and maintainability (K5) because of the expert evaluations errors in the same method are recognized equivalent (2). Using correlation analysis we determined the tightness of the linear connection of the generalized ergonomic indicator with a set of complex indices K1, K2, K3, K4, K5. In order to study the relationship between the generalized ergonomic indicator and integrated indicators the authors carried out samples of 12 models of domestic-owned and foreign production excavators. The correlation ratio in this case is measured by means of multiple correlation coefficient Ri;1,2...p, which is a generalization of the doubled correlation coefficient. The correlation coefficient Ri;1,2...p is determined by the formula
Ri ;1,2... p
1
qp qii
(3)
Where |qp| – the determinant of a matrix, p = 1, ..., 5 (the coefficients of controllability, habitability, serviceability, adoption and maintainability), qii – an element cofactor. Matrix of sample correlation coefficients is presented as
qp
§1 ¨ ¨ r21 ¨ ... ¨¨ © rp1
r12 1 ... rp 2
... r1 p · ¸ ... r2 p ¸ ... ... ¸ ¸ ... 1 ¸¹ pu p
(4)
As a result of the calculations the value of multiple correlation coefficient Ri;1,2...p=0,59 has been defined. It shows a stable relationship between the generalized ergonomic indicator and a set of complex indicators. In this sample multiple correlation coefficient Ri;1,2...p in absolute value is not less than any of the doubled correlation coefficients , which, in turn, proved to be equal to 0,57 [13-18].
V.S. Velikanov et al. / Procedia Engineering 150 (2016) 1215 – 1220
1219
For the implementation of ergonomic development and implementation of the design and schematic solutions in the standard models of excavators, a computer program has been designed to simulate and group the workplace of the excavator operator. The main requirement for such models is probably a more complete reproduction of the excavator structure and control principles, taking into account ergonomic requirements [13, 18-21]. For ergonomic design a three-dimensional model of the system ”Man-Excavator-Face” was developed, which allows you to choose the rational constructive-technological solutions and to identify the ergonomic parameters of excavators that require improvement. Computer graphics means are used to solve the problem of spatial and anthropometric compatibility of an excavator operator with the workplace elements. The model allows performing: x three-dimensional simulation of an operator workplace with the group of elements and assurance of information interaction; x an excavator operator dummy for ergonomic assessments and design of surfaces to place the body, taking into consideration the diversity of anthropometric characteristics of a person. When modeling an ergonomic system “Man-Excavator-Face” the formalization of the anthropometric characteristics is required, designed in a mathematical model of “Man – the Excavator Operator”. A simulation model of an operator (dummy) is created according to the anthropometric parameters of the person. The dummy is placed in a simulation excavator cab; the result is evaluated as an ergonomic index – controllability (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2. Simulation Model of an Excavator Operator and a Cab.
The developed model takes into account: x technical means of work (workplace – cab); x labour process; production environment (light and vibration in the workplace); x individual characteristics (anthropometric characteristics). Three-dimensional model consists of three main subsystems: 1. The workplace layout, workspace visibility – adjustability to individual anthropometric parameters of an operator. Visibility is modeled with a conditional point of view, taking into account the natural deviation of the excavator operator within physiologically rational postures. When evaluating review accuracy for each monitoring object one or more points of view is accepted to the natural deviation, which provides a better view. In this approach, the adequacy assessment of the workplace developed project is carried out long before its manifestation in the material.
1220
V.S. Velikanov et al. / Procedia Engineering 150 (2016) 1215 – 1220
2. The isolation of the workplace – as a result of research a database of various types of seats and suspensions has been developed. Reduced vibration in the operator workplace can be achieved by installing vibration isolators; the model implemented a choice of the excavator vibration operator's seat. 3. The excavator working space illumination – the model implemented a choice of projector types placed in a simulation model of a mining excavator. Illumination of the excavator outside working space will allow you to assess visually the illumination zone, the shape, and size of light spots generated by the spotlights, setting the installation options. The research results can be used in designing new models of excavator equipment for realization of innovative development programs at engineering enterprises. 7. Conclusions
The relationship tightness of the generalized ergonomic indicator has been found with a comprehensive set of indicators K1, K2, K3, K4, K5, considered as a whole. The relationship tightness is determined by multiple correlation coefficients. The obtained multiple correlation coefficient Ri;1,2...p=0,59, indicates that there is a stable relationship between the generalized ergonomic indicator and the set of complex indices. Automated software has been developed for the simulation and the operator workplace layout, which can be used in the design of new models for mining excavators. Program features allow you to create the required light level in the workplace and outer spaces of the excavator, also to reduce the harmful effects of vibration due to the optimal selection of anti-vibration devices. References [1] V.F. Venda, V.K. Kalin, The laws of ergonomics applied to design and testing of workstations, in: O. Chebykin, G. Bedny, W. Karwowski (Eds.), Ergonomics and psychology, Developments in theory and practice, CRC Press, Taylor and Francis, London, 2008. pp. 71–88. [2] V.F. Venda, Engineering psychology and synthesis of information display systems, Mechanical engineering, Moscow, 1975. [3] G.M. Zurakowski, V.V. Pavlov, Regularities of functioning ergatic systems, Radio and communication, Moscow, 1987. [4] V.M. Munipov, V.P. Zinchenko, Ergonomics: human-centered design techniques, programmatic tools and environment, Logos, Moscow, 2001. [5] V.M. Munipov, V.P. Zinchenko, Ergonomics: a textbook, Springer, Berlin, 2005. [6] A.A. Krylov, Man in automated control systems, Izd vo LGU, Leningrad, 1972. [7] M. Montmollin, Systems Man and Machine, TRANS. from Franz., Mir, Moscow, 1973. [8] W. Woodson, D. Conover, Handbook of engineering psychology for engineers and artists-designers, translated from English, Moscow, 1968. [9] V.S. Golovin, the Ergonomics of mining equipment, Nedra, Moscow, 1990. [10] F. Nachreiner, Standarts for ergonomics principles relating to the disign of work systems and tî mental workload, Applied ergonomics, Moscow, 1995. [11] M. Schmid, Ergonomic settings, Mir, Moscow, 1980. [12] C. Drury, Ergonomics and the quality movement, Manuscript, State University New York at Buffalo, Department of Industrial Engeneering, New York, 1996. [13] V.S. Velikanov, The Implementation of approaches to improve mining excavator ergonomics, NMSTU, Magnitogorsk, 2011. [14] S.A. Baron, Control theoretic approach to modeling human supervisory control of dynamic systems, Man Machine Systems Research. 1 (1984) 147. [15] Ɇ.-C. Chen, S.-J. Cheng, Y. Hwang, An empirical investigation of the relationship between intellectual capital and firm’s market value and financial performance, Journal of Intellectual Capital. 2 (2005) 159176. [16] R.J. House, Culture, Leadership, and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, SAGE Publ., Rhousand Oaks, 2004. [17] D. Bannister, Personal construct theory: a summary and experimental paradigm, Acta Psychologica. 20 (1962) 104–120. [18] O.S. Logunova, I.I. Matsko, I.A. Posohov, Automatic system for intelligent support of continuous cast billet production control processes, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 74 (2014) 14071418. DOI: 10.1007/s00170-014-6056-4. [19] O.S. Logunova, N.S. Sibileva, The Results of Comparative Analysis of Solving Multicriteria Problems Optimization for Calculation the Structure of Charge Materials for Electric Arc Furnace, in: Proceeding of International Conference on Computer Science and Information Engineering (Csie 2015). (2015) 394-399. [20] J. Songa, X. Qub, C.-H. Chena, Simulation of lifting motions using a novel multi-objective optimization approach, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 53 (2016) 3747. [21] K. Landau, Ergonomic software tools in product and workplace design: a review of recent developments in human modelling and other design aids, IfAO Institut für Arbeitsorganisation, Stuttgart, Germany, 2000.
