User-centred design to promote the effective use of rear-mountefoldable roll-over protective structures (Fropss): Prototype evaluation among novice and expert farmers.

Aim of study: We tested the perceived quality in use of a prototype of a handling supporting device, developed through a user-centred design process intended for rear-mounted foldable rollover protective-structures (FROPSs).Area of study: The study was performed in the Province of Cuneo, which has the largest number of farms and the highest share of utilized agricultural area (UAA) in Piedmont Region, NW Italy.Material and methods: Three groups of users, novice-novice (NN), novice-expert (NE) and expert-expert (EE) were asked to raise two rear-mounted FROPSs: a traditional one and a second one equipped with a supporting device which consisted of a gas spring and a rod. A questionnaire has been used to record the perceived quality in use of both FROPSs (effort, physical discomfort, temporal demand and ease of use) and perceived usefulness and attitudes toward the adoption of the supporting device.Main results: All groups reported less physical effort, more stable postures, higher ease of use in handling the FROPS equipped with the supporting device; NN users, in particular, declared to be willing to adopt the supporting device in the future on their tractors when commercially available.Research highlights: Previous studies reported discomfort in operating the FROPS as the main cause of its improper use. A solution to improve FROPS reachability was developed and tested with users. Benefits were perceived by both novice users and expert users

Conveying safety messages on agricultural machinery: The comprehension of safety pictorials in a group of migrant farmworkers in Italy

The comprehension of safety signs affixed to agricultural machinery is fundamental to warning users about the residual risks which cannot be eliminated with machinery design and the adoption of protections. This is particularly relevant for the migrant workforce, which may encounter some language barriers with written safety communication. The present study aimed to investigate the comprehension of safety signs affixed to agricultural machinery in a group of migrants from both European and non-European countries employed in Italian agriculture. Thirty-seven migrant farmworkers (12 Indians, 17 Pakistanis, and eight Romanians) were individually interviewed to test the comprehension of four safety signs referring to the main causes of fatal and non-fatal injuries caused by interactions with farm machinery. Romanians obtained the highest comprehension performance (68.8% of correct answers), followed by Indians (35.4%), with Pakistanis being last (32.4%). The nationality and the previous experience as a farmworker significantly affected the comprehension of safety signs. The results pointed out the importance of adequately training migrants on the meaning of safety signs. Beside this, the study suggests a redesign of the signs, considering some signs' features to enhance pictorials' cross-cultural comprehension

Risk assessment for musculoskeletal disorders in forestry: A comparison between RULA and REBA in the manual feeding of a wood-chipper

The analysis of the postural attitude of workers during the interaction with workstation\u2019s elements and working environment is essential in the evaluation and prevention of biomechanical overload risk in workplaces. RULA (Rapid Upper Limb Assessment) and REBA (Rapid Entire Body Assessment) are the two easiest methods for postural risk assessment in the workplace. Few studies investigated postural risk in forestry sector with regard to human\u2013machine interaction, in particular manually fed wood-chippers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the postures assumed by an operator during the manual feeding of a wood-chipper, and to compare RULA and REBA, in order to identify the more effective and appropriate method for the assessment of the risk of biomechanical postural overload. The results pointed out several postural issues of the upper limbs, and showed that RULA is a more precautionary method to protect operator\u2019s health during the targeted tasks. Implications to improve the human\u2013wood-chipper interaction are discussed

A survey on daylighting education in italian universities. Knowledge of standards, metrics and simulation tools

Daylighting is a strategic topic to achieve sustainable buildings, so it is more and more imperative that it is implemented in architecture curricula to prepare a new generation of daylighting-oriented practitioners. In this frame, the DAYKE project (Daylight Knowledge in Europe) was set up to explore the level of knowledge about daylighting among European professionals and students. DAYKE-Europe was replicated as DAYKE-Italy to study the knowledge of daylight standards, metrics and software among Italian architecture students, and to compare it to that observed within DAYKE-Europe. A sample of 542 questionnaires were collected in five universities. Primary outcomes were: (i) a general low level of knowledge on daylighting was observed; the most cited metrics were the average daylight factor and the geometrical window-to-floor ratio, while climate-based daylight metrics were rarely mentioned; (ii) master science M.Sc. students reported more knowledge on daylight metrics and regulations than bachelor B.Sc. students, while the implementation of daylight metrics and strategies in projects was mainly deficient among B.Sc. students; (iii) compared to European students (DAYKE-Europe), Italian students showed a higher knowledge of daylight metrics and software (especially as for M.Sc. students), while the opposite was observed for standards, regulations and protocols. Based on the results, a reconsideration of daylight education in architecture curricula is recommended

A Survey on Daylighting Education in Italian Universities : Knowledge of Standards, Metrics and Simulation Tools

Daylighting is a strategic topic to achieve sustainable buildings, so it is more and more imperative that it is implemented in architecture curricula to prepare a new generation of daylighting-oriented practitioners. In this frame, the DAYKE project (Daylight Knowledge in Europe) was set up to explore the level of knowledge about daylighting among European professionals and students. DAYKE-Europe was replicated as DAYKE-Italy to study the knowledge of daylight standards, metrics and software among Italian architecture students, and to compare it to that observed within DAYKE-Europe. A sample of 542 questionnaires were collected in five universities. Primary outcomes were: (i) a general low level of knowledge on daylighting was observed; the most cited metrics were the average daylight factor and the geometrical window-to-floor ratio, while climate-based daylight metrics were rarely mentioned; (ii) master science M.Sc. students reported more knowledge on daylight metrics and regulations than bachelor B.Sc. students, while the implementation of daylight metrics and strategies in projects was mainly deficient among B.Sc. students; (iii) compared to European students (DAYKE-Europe), Italian students showed a higher knowledge of daylight metrics and software (especially as for M.Sc. students), while the opposite was observed for standards, regulations and protocols. Based on the results, a reconsideration of daylight education in architecture curricula is recommended