Several tools are sold and recommended for closing and sealing flexible intermediate bulk containers (bulk bags) which are used to transport product that has been mined and processed. However, there is limited information on the risks, physical demands, or the benefits of using one tool over another. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the physical demands involved with two closing methods and several sealing tools in order to provide recommendations for selecting tools to reduce exposure to risk factors for work-related musculoskeletal disorders. In this study, twelve participants completed bag closing and sealing tasks using two different closing methods and eight sealing tools on two types of bulk bags. Physical demands and performance were evaluated using muscle activity, perceived exertion, subjective ratings of use, and time. Results indicate that using the "flowering" method to close bags required on average 32% less muscle activity, 30% less perceived exertion, 42% less time, and was preferred by participants compared to using the "snaking" method. For sealing, there was no single method significantly better across all measures; however, using a pneumatic cable tie gun consistently had the lowest muscle activity and perceived exertion ratings. The pneumatic cable tie gun did require approximately 33% more time to seal the bag compared to methods without a tool, but the amount of time to seal the bag was comparable to using other tools. Further, sealing a spout bulk bag required on average 13% less muscle activity, 18% less perceived exertion, 35% less time, and was preferred by participants compared to sealing a duffle bulk bag. The current results suggest that closing the spout bag using the flowering method and sealing the bag using the pneumatic cable tie gun that is installed with a tool balancer is ergonomically advantageous. Our findings can help organizations select methods and tools that pose the lowest physical demands when closing and sealing bulk bags.

中文翻译：

---

散装袋封口过程中的物理需求分析

出售并推荐使用多种工具来关闭和密封用于运输已开采和加工的产品的柔性中间散装容器（散装袋）。但是，关于使用一种工具相对于另一种工具的风险、物理需求或好处的信息有限。本研究的目的是评估两种闭合方法和几种密封工具所涉及的身体需求，以便为选择工具提供建议，以减少暴露于与工作相关的肌肉骨骼疾病的风险因素。在这项研究中，12 名参与者使用两种不同的封口方法和八种封口工具在两种类型的散装袋上完成了封袋和封口任务。使用肌肉活动、感知的劳累、使用的主观评价和时间来评估身体需求和表现。结果表明，与使用“蛇行”方法相比，使用“开花”方法关闭袋子所需的肌肉活动平均减少 32%，感知用力减少 30%，时间减少 42%，并且是参与者的首选。对于密封，没有一种方法在所有测量中都明显更好；然而，使用气动束线枪始终具有最低的肌肉活动和感知的劳累等级。与不使用工具的方法相比，气动扎带枪确实需要大约多 33% 的时间来密封袋子，但密封袋子的时间与使用其他工具相当。此外，与密封粗袋散装袋相比，密封喷口散装袋所需的肌肉活动平均减少 13%，感知用力减少 18%，时间减少 35%，并且是参与者的首选。目前的结果表明，使用开花方法关闭嘴袋并使用安装有工具平衡器的气动扎线枪密封袋在人体工程学上是有利的。我们的研究结果可以帮助组织选择在关闭和密封散装袋时对物理要求最低的方法和工具。