PubMed · 10841165
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
K Nielen. 2000-02-05. Ergonomic microscope workstation.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(00)82064-4
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVES: To revise the criteria used in the present "Required Sweat Rate" standard ISO 7933 (1989) for the prediction of the maximum duration of work in hot environments. METHODS: Review of the literature and in particular, of the bases for the present criteria. RESULTS: A new method is proposed, to take into account the increase in core temperature associated with activity in neutral environments. The prediction of maximum wetness and maximum sweat rates are revised, as well as the limits for maximum water loss and core temperature. CONCLUSION: An improved set of maximum values and limits is described, to be used in the revised version of the ISO 7933 standard. Due to the major modifications to the "Required Sweat Rate" index and in order to avoid any confusion, it is suggested that the revised model be renamed the "Predicted Heat Strain" (PHS) model.
This paper offers a set of sociotechnical principles to guide system design, and some consideration of the role of principles of this kind. The principles extend earlier formulations by Cherns (1976, Human Relations, 29, 783-792; 1987, Human Relations, 40, 153-162). They are intended to apply to the design of new systems, including those incorporating new information technologies and a range of modern management practices and ways of working. They attempt to provide a more integrated perspective than is apparent in existing formulations. The principles are of three broad types: meta, content and process, though they are highly interrelated. They are for use by system managers, users and designers, and by technologists and social scientists. They offer ideas for debate and provide devices through which detailed design discussions can be elaborated. The principles are most likely to be effective if they are relatively freestanding, but supported by relevant methods and tools. The principles are necessary but not sufficient to make a substantial contribution to design practice.
Too often, ergonomics is relegated to being a "post-design" evaluation, leaving ergonomists little opportunity to make significant and important design changes. One way to start attacking this problem is to study the process of design and, in particular, ergonomics in design. This article describes the findings from a four-month long participant-observer study of the relationship between ergonomics and engineering design. The study was conducted in the context of a large, interdisciplinary project consisting of design of a control room for a nuclear power plant. It was observed that designers and ergonomists must negotiate through a changing web of constraints from many sources. The impact that these constraints had on the course of the design was documented. A model is developed based on the abstraction hierarchy (Rasmussen, 1985, IEEE Trans. Systems Man Cybernet. SMC-15, 234-243; 1990, Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 5, 5-16) which shows the interaction of conflicting goals as ergonomists and other designers attempt to solve a complex design problem. This model leads to several insights: (1) locally optimal ergonomic designs may not be globally optimal, (2) ergonomists can improve their solutions by understanding the goals of other designers, and (3) future tools to aid ergonomists must be compatible with the constraint-rich environments in which they work.