Technology Environments for Paraplegic
Operators
E. O’Herlihy and W.F. Gaughran
1Abstract
Access to and accommodation for wheelchair users to function as equal team-members, in engineering workshops, as well as training and education facilities, has for far too long been quite limited. In this context with shortages in the skilled workforce as well as a shift in the balance of age, a valuable human resource is largely ignored. In Ireland, the recent Equal Opportunities Legislation and a heightened awareness of the potential capabilities of wheelchair users has prompted research in the redesign of the work environments with a view to valuing and fully integrating wheelchair users in the engineering and manufacturing environments. This makes both social and economic sense.
While existing safety requirements in engineering environments may be adequate for able-bodied users, an inclusive design approach to the work environment and the machine tooling interface can benefit not just paraplegic workers but the complete workforce. Access and operations ergonomics relating to work areas and machines will enhance user friendliness and safety for all and contribute to inclusivity. Research at the University of Limerick has identified that there is little evidence of paraplegic involvement in engineering and technology environments. A number of influencing factors are under consideration, which will extend the “normal” ergonomic data and workspace design in the context of access for all. While the integration of paraplegic wheelchair users into engineering and technology workshop environments is largely ignored, this paper identifies safety modifications and other key areas that are paramount to making these environments not just inclusive but enhanced environments for both able bodied and the paraplegic user.
1 Department of Manufacturing and Operations Engineering, University of
1 Introduction
Research indicates that there is very little integration in training and operations in engineering manufacture and processing, of a highly valuable human resource – the paraplegic operator. There is also little evidence to show that paraplegics have been integrated into engineering environments in second or third level education, training or employment.
There are few Irish third level students with physical disabilities involved in engineering. In fact only five students (0.0049% undergraduate population) were involved in engineering during the academic year 1998/99 (Hoey, 2000). Only 50 students (0.04% undergraduate population) have physical disabilities non-ambulant but no breakdown of the area of study was given. In employment the Irish “tiger” economy has failed to resolve the mass unemployment for people with disabilities in Ireland. Eighty-seven percent of the 13,000 members of the Irish Wheelchair Association are unemployed. In England, for every 100,000 people in paid employment there are 11 wheelchair users, for every 100,000 people employed in office type buildings there are 18 wheelchair users employed and for every 100,000 people employed in other workplaces there are 5 wheelchair users (Goldsmith, 1997). Regarding training facilities in Ireland there is little evidence of any paraplegic users training in engineering environments.
Apart from recognising the dignity of the paraplegics through the extension of their autonomy, the need to meaningfully include people with physical disabilities could increase dramatically for the following reasons. The general population in most countries is getting older. With increasing age comes increasing variability in physical capability and hence a greater requirement for products and services to be designed for a broader user base (Keates et al., 2000). By 2020 almost half the adult population in the UK will be over 50 with the 80’s being the most rapidly growing sector (Coleman, 1993).
In Ireland the Equal Status Act 2000 provides protection to people with disabilities as the act sets out to prohibit discrimination. Other minority groups are also included in the Act. The Act locates “disability” politically and morally in the context of “rights” and routes to redress, for a whole range of social groups historically discriminated against and in that context of combating discrimination, disability is now increasingly regarded within the civil rights context (Bruce et al., 2001). The legislation means that employers, schools, and colleges are obliged to provide reasonable accommodations to all employees, or students in the case of educational establishments.
The research at the University of Limerick is endeavouring not just to take cognisance of the Act, but is also involved with design strategies and practical provisions, which are intended to fully integrate people with disabilities and particularly wheelchair users in engineering environments. The investigation into accessibility and the general safety of the paraplegic user into engineering and technology environments was conducted using the following methods:
• an investigation was carried out on the accessibility of fourteen technology classroom environments in Post Primary Schools;
• a questionnaire was distributed to 38 wheelchair users in Post Primary Schools;
• a follow up interview with three students who are wheelchair users participating in engineering and technology subjects;
• a survey of industrial workshops was carried out on the integration of people with disabilities in engineering workshop environments in Ireland;
• new and existing plans of Engineering/Technology environments of Post Primary Schools were analysed with respect to safety and accessibility.
2 Workshop Field Research
Safety is the first topic taught to any student participating in a practical subject. It is the teacher’s responsibility to ensure his/her students are working in a safe environment and free from danger at all times. The practical classrooms visited presented a dangerous environment for any wheelchair-using student and included some of the following problems:
• emergency exits, emergency switches and fire extinguishers were not accessible to the wheelchair user;
• in one school, to use the emergency exit necessitated taking a step down onto grassland, which is unsuitable, if not impossible, for a wheelchair user;
• the average height of fire extinguishers was 1700mm (to top of the extinguisher) from ground level. In one engineering workshop there was no visible sign of a fire extinguisher;
• the average height of emergency switches was 1382mm, which is inappropriate for the paraplegic users as the maximum recommended reach for an adult paraplegic operator is 1200mm for forward reach without obstruction and1300mm for side reach without obstruction (Accessibility in Singapore, 1995);
• of the fourteen workshops visited none allowed free movement for the user with a disability. In some cases part of the room was accessible but problems occurred around machines, particularly lathes, where the average workspace was just 864mm. For self-propelled standard wheelchairs the minimum clear width needs to be 900mm (Goldsmith, 1984);
• in all workshops visited the heat treatment area was completely inaccessible;
• for a paraplegic user the recommended working height for manual work is between 660mm and 760mm and working height would be 815mm for fixed full sized armrests. It is important to note that a lower height than 815mm is recommended for manual work (Wilkoff and Abed, 1997). The lowest bench height seen in schools was 770mm and the highest was 800mm, which is unsuitable for most paraplegic users;
• in four of the seven Engineering rooms everyday tools were placed on the bench, but other tools were simply inaccessible to the wheelchair user as they were stored too high, or in lockers/cupboards which were inaccessible.
3 Results of Questionnaire
In December 2000, a study was undertaken to ascertain the number of wheelchair users in Post Primary Education. The study covered a total of 121 schools. In these schools the total student population was 54,793 of which 38 were wheelchair users (0.069% of the student body investigated).
Each of the 38 wheelchair users received a survey on the accessibility of Post Primary Buildings of which 28 replied (74%). Eleven of the thirteen students stated that they would like to study a practical subject. The practical subjects mentioned were art, home economics, music, physical education and Materials Technology (Wood). Every student should be able to participate in his/her chosen subject range. However only five of the 28 students that replied were studying engineering or technology subjects.
Safety is a major concern in any classroom, but even more so in a technology classroom. Being a wheelchair user presents further difficulties, as the student has limited access to machines. The student’s face is often in the line of work and therefore is in more danger than an able-bodied user. When students were questioned regarding their safety in their practical environments, three out of the five wheelchair users stated that they did not feel safe.
Ironically two of these students are not using machines in their respective practical classrooms (Materials and Technology (Metal) and Materials Technology (Wood)), but still feel unsafe. The question is raised - why are these students not using machines? In the other classes, the remaining three students are using drills and band saws but stated that they have great difficulty operating these machines. Just as entrance doors and corridors should be accessible to the wheelchair user, so too should the practical workshop. All five of the students surveyed found the workshops, which they use, poorly accessible. Table heights and reach are major problem for wheelchair users and students undertaking practical subjects stated this as a major area of difficulty.
4 Results of Interviews with Students
To further develop the idea that engineering/technology environments are not suitable for paraplegic users in their current state, three wheelchair users involved in engineering/technology environments were interviewed in exceptional detail. The findings included:
• students felt that all areas of the workshop environment posed difficulty for the wheelchair users;
• the current bench design, along with the vice mounted on it, presented major difficulties to all wheelchair users;
• the hacksaw was the most difficult tool to use;
• personal safety for themselves and other students was a major concern to all those interviewed;
• even though students spent the majority of their time on the bench they felt very uncomfortable in this area;
• access to benches, equipment and machines was difficult for all students who use wheelchairs. Emergency switches and controls were out of reach;
• all students interviewed reported difficulties in moving around the workshop and working within it;
• students felt that teachers were a great support but the wheelchair users felt that they were a burden on the teacher as they constantly relied on them for help.
Suggested changes by students included lower benches, sinks, shelves and equipment. When students were questioned on whether or not a tray would be a good idea to protect their legs and to carry material, all strongly agreed that it was essential.
5 Industrial Workshops Survey
To investigate the current employment situation, it was deemed necessary to carry out a questionnaire on the integration of the paraplegic user and people with disabilities into workshop environments. The questionnaire was distributed nationally to 120 manufacturing workshops and 37 responses were received, with nine indicating the workshops were no longer trading. The results obtained shed new light on the current situation for people with disabilities and their integration.
Only 3 of the 28 (11%) of workshops in operation, employed people with disabilities. 22 of the 28 (78%) that replied stated that their workshop was not suitable for people with disabilities to work in. They gave reasons such as equipment not user friendly, dangerous environments, health and safety and excessive demands from insurers. With regard to wheelchair users, issues such as workshop being too small and cramped, machinery being inaccessible and flying debris to name but a few were presented as reasons to keep wheelchair users from entering this environment.
Twenty-five percent of workshop managers stated that they would be uncomfortable working with people who had a disability. Six of the workshop managers stated that their workshop was suitable for people with disabilities to work in, yet three stated that they would be uncomfortable working with people who have a disability. It is interesting to know that two of these workshops employed and continue to employ people with disabilities. The total number of employees on the workshop floor represented by this survey was 330 yet there are only three people with disabilities currently employed. In the past there has also
been 3 people with disabilities employed. Interestingly none of the six employees with disabilities are wheelchair users.
Training and information regarding people with disabilities was queried as part of the questionnaire and 19 of the 22 respondents felt that training was required for working with people who had a disability. Eighty-two percent of workshop managers would also be interested in receiving information on the integration of people with disabilities if it was published. Some areas of interest included health and safety, building regulations, how to deal with people with disabilities and changes needed to accommodate people with disabilities.
6 Analysis of Floor Plan Layouts
The initial investigation into the accessibility of engineering/technology environments analysed nine workshop plans and uncovered the following problems for the paraplegic user:
• in five of the six rooms, that have emergency exits, they are totally inaccessible to wheelchair users;
• in other rooms emergency exits presented a problem, as they are inaccessible from certain parts of the room;
• in an emergency situation in all the rooms analysed, the paraplegic user would be in great danger due to traffic congestion.
Designing accessible exits for the paraplegic user will promote inclusive design while increasing safety for all users in engineering/technology environments.
Access and egress are difficult for a paraplegic user as door widths are designed to the minimum standard. In the plans studied the clear opening width of the doors is 750mm. This minimum should be increased to between 850-900mm to allow students enter and exit the room with less difficulty. Increasing door widths will make rooms more accessible for all.
In both technology classrooms and engineering workshops access to desks and workbenches for the paraplegic user is difficult. Free movement is not allowed and the paraplegic user will have to move furniture, as well as other students, to get to their desks/workbenches, causing general disruption. The paraplegic user may also be obstructing their fellow students in reaching their desks. Without satisfactory space a wheelchair user can be a hazard on an exit line.
Examination of the floor plans show that machines are mainly positioned in line with walls. This can cause difficulty to wheelchair users because there are desks, presses, project areas and work areas obstructing the student’s path to these machines. The paraplegic user may pose a safety hazard when carrying out different processes on machines, as they will block entrances, exits and circulation routes. Traffic flow during class time will also present difficulties for the paraplegic user due to congestion in certain areas.
Store rooms or storage facilities need to be modified to benefit all. Paraplegic students may find it very difficult to get to and from storage presses at the beginning and end of class due to their location and also because of the volume of
traffic. Access to presses lockers etc. may be too high for the students to reach, also requiring modification.
7 Discussion
Immediate changes need to be implemented to benefit all in engineering/technology environments as previous designs have neglected “universal” access. Results indicate that the safe and comfortable inclusion of the paraplegic user into this environment requires a change in attitude and design. It is clear that in general, current engineering workshops and classroom layouts have neglected to incorporate inclusive ergonomic data, work design, universal access and human factors engineering.
By integrating paraplegics in engineering/technology environments, areas such as safety, access, workspace design and layout will enhance training and work facilities for all. These above issues are prerequisite for the integration of the paraplegic user. As a result of alterations, productivity and working comfort for able-bodied users is likely to increase.
Creating better access to workshops will help all users in a variety of ways. By making circulation routes larger, transportation of materials, operators passing by operators, movement of people of larger stature will be unconstrained. By storing goods in accessible places people of smaller stature will benefit, production time will be increased, risk of injury will be decreased and tools will be conveniently located.
The research has identified five key areas relating to educational and operational inclusion of the paraplegic user into engineering and classroom environments have arisen:
• safety;
• access;
• hand tool design;
• workbench design;
• drill design.
Research would suggest that by addressing and combining these elements, a range of previously unavailable activities might be undertaken by paraplegic users in a safe and productive environment. Safety and access are fundamental requirements in any working environment. The workbench is the main work area for students and traditional designs present major obstacles for paraplegic users. The drill is the most common machine used and likely to be the first one students or employees will use. Therefore ergonomic adjustments need to be investigated to benefit the paraplegic user and others. Further work hopes to draw up new ergonomic data in all the above areas. This will be incorporated in the context of inclusive design principles to the benefit all users in relation to engineering/technology environments.
8 References
Accessibility in Singapore (1995) Code on Barrier-free Accessibility in Buildings, http://www.dpa.org.sg/DPA/access/access.htm
Bruce A, O’Grady M, Ahern E (2001) Providing Access for Irish Students with Disabilities: the UCC Experience of Technology, Support and Guidance
Coleman R (1993) A demographic overview of the ageing of first world populations. Applied Ergonomic 24(1):5-8
Goldsmith S (1984) Designing for the Disabled, 3rd Edition Fully Revised. RIBA Publications, London
Goldsmith S (1997) Designing for the Disabled: The New Paradigm. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford
Hoey P (2000) Students with Disabilities in Higher Education: Initial Findings of the Survey on Provision for Students with Disabilities in Higher Education for the Academic Year 1998/99. AHEAD
Keates S, Lebbon C, Clarkson J (2000) Investigating industry attitudes to Universal Design. In: Proceedings of RESNA 2000, Orlando, FL, pp 276-278
