See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/303515295

Physiological Data Collection and Monitoring of Construction Equipment

Operators

Conference Paper · May 2016

DOI: 10.1061/9780784479827.293

CITATIONS READS
6 1,655

3 authors:

Ibukun Awolusi Eric Marks

University of Texas at San Antonio Georgia Institute of Technology
51 PUBLICATIONS   524 CITATIONS    41 PUBLICATIONS   912 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Matthew Hallowell
University of Colorado Boulder
138 PUBLICATIONS   6,116 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Live Demos/Naturalistic Injury Simulations Project View project

Attribute-Based Construction Safety Risk Analysis, Simulation, and Prediction View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ibukun Awolusi on 06 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Construction Research Congress 2016 2946

Physiological Data Collection and Monitoring of

Construction Equipment Operators

Ibukun Awolusi1; Eric Marks, Ph.D., P.E.2; and Matthew Hallowell, Ph.D.3

1
Graduate Research Assistant, Dept. of Civil, Construction, and Environmental
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by U OF ALA LIB/SERIALS on 06/12/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Engineering, Univ. of Alabama, 251 H.M. Comer, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487. E-mail:

igawolusi@crimson.ua.edu
2
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering,
Univ. of Alabama, 251 H.M. Comer, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 (corresponding author).
E-mail: eric.marks@eng.ua.edu
3
Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering,
Univ. of Colorado at Boulder, 1111 Engineering Dr., Boulder, CO 80309-0428. E-
mail: matthew.hallowell@colorado.edu

Abstract
Construction sites are characterized by rugged outdoor environments,
changing site conditions, and dynamic interactions between resources including
personnel, equipment, and materials. These harsh environmental conditions and
working situations have a unique impact on construction equipment operator’s
physiological information. The primary objective of this research is to create a
framework to measure and analyze construction equipment operator’s physiological
properties including breathing rate, heart rate, body posture, and many others
variables. To achieve this objective, physiological data was collected from two
construction equipment operators for five days working on an active excavation
construction site. Quantitative data including several physiological variables were
identified and analyzed to understand how physiological properties of equipment
operators change throughout a work day at varying outdoor temperatures and varying
site conditions. Research results identify and discuss changes in physiological
properties corresponding with changes in site situations, current task, and
environmental conditions. The major contribution of this research is the framework
developed for collecting and analyzing construction equipment operator’s
physiological data. By collecting and analyzing physiological data of construction
equipment operators, potentially hazardous site situations and environmental
conditions can be identified and mitigated through site planning and employee safety
education and training which will increase safety awareness.

Keywords: Physiological data; Construction equipment operator; Construction

safety.

INTRODUCTION
Construction site workers often encounter various health risks as a result of
the austere and dynamic work environments. The harsh environmental conditions and
ever evolving site conditions on construction sites can impact the safety performance
and overall performance of construction equipment operators. Although active safety

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2016

 Construction Research Congress 2016 2947

leading indicators have been used to pro-actively monitor safety performance of

construction workers, there are few methods available to collect and analyze these
pro-active data for safety (Hallowell et al. 2013, Hinze et al. 2013). Previous research
efforts emphasized the relationships between construction working conditions and
worker’s safety and found that quantifying and analyzing worker’s physiological
condition is complex (Sawacha et al. 1999, Arditi et al. 2005). Potential findings
regarding overall worker safety and health can be hindered by the difficulties
experienced in collecting and analyzing physiological data (Sarkin et al. 2000).
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by U OF ALA LIB/SERIALS on 06/12/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The main objective of the research is to create a framework to measure and

analyze construction equipment operator’s physiological properties. Physiological
monitoring devices were used to collect physiological properties of two male
construction equipment operators for five consecutive days. A complete discussion of
the analyzed experimental results along with the envisioned future research is also
presented.

LITERATURE REVIEW
The following review discusses the significance of monitoring the
physiological properties of construction equipment operators. The review further
investigates existing methods for collecting physiological information or
physiological data. A research needs statement is also provided based on the review
findings.

Impact of Physiological Information on Overall Health

Physiological measurements such as heart rate and heart rate variability can
provide a multidimensional assessment of the body (Kantor et al. 2001). One
researcher identified a correlation between low heart rate variability with increased
risk of cardiovascular issues and cancer (Kristal-Boneh 2000). Mental stress has been
found to impact heart rate variability and increase the probability for cardiovascular
disease within a person (Hjortskov et al. 2004, Thayer et al. 2010). Other influential
factors of heart rate and heart rate variability include a person’s exposure to
particulate air pollution (Magari et al. 2001), and noise pollution (Lusk et al. 2004). In
general, previous research has identified that heart rate and resulting heart rate
variability have a significant impact on a person’s overall health.
The rugged outdoor environment on active construction sites can impact an
equipment operator’s heart rate. For example, noise exposure was directly linked to
unhealthy heart rate variation (Lusk et al. 2004). Additionally, when the air
temperature is extremely high or low, the heart pumps more blood which may
increase a person’s heart rate by five to ten beats a minute (AHA, 2015). Physical
activity and high working stress can also lead to an increase in heart rate (Taelman, et
al. 2009).
A worker’s heart rate variability (HRV) measures the variation of time
between heartbeats (Tsuji et al. 1996). Analysis of heart rate variability (HRV) has
become a popular noninvasive tool for assessing the activities of the autonomic
nervous system (Acharya et al. 2004). Individuals categorized as obese exhibit
attenuated Heart Rate Variability (HRV), which is generally considered to be an
indicator of poor automatic heart function. The Body Mass Index (BMI) is a value

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2016

 Construction Research Congress 2016 2948

derived from the mass (weight) and height of an individual, and the commonly
accepted BMI ranges are the following (CDC 2015):
a) Underweight individual: 18.5 (unitless) dimensionless
b) Normally weighted individual: 18.5 to 24.9 (unitless)
c) Overweight individual: 25 to 29.9 (unitless)
d) Obese person: over 30 (unitless)
Breathing rate can also affect cardiac stability which greatly impacts a
person’s heart rate and heart rate variability (Sroufe et. al. 1971). Similar to heart rate
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by U OF ALA LIB/SERIALS on 06/12/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

and heart rate variability, substantial evidence exists that an abnormal respiratory rate
is a predictor of potentially serious clinical events (Cretikos et. al. 2008).
Bradypnea is a disease in which a person experiences unusually slow rate of
breathing characterized as a breaking rate of 12 breaths per minute or lower for any
person between the ages of 12 to 50 (Overdyk et al. 2007). People diagnosed with
Bradypnea may experience dizziness, chest pains, weakness and memory confusion.
Measurement of worker’s breathing rate is a necessary predictor of overall human
health.
Ergonomic problems such as incorrect thoracic posture can also result in
various types of injuries and illnesses (Marx and Hootegem 2007). Improper thoracic
posture can cause musculoskeletal disorders (David 2005). Lack of skills in
ergonomics and training are believed to contribute to poor ergonomic practices and
result in loss of worker productivity and decreased health and safety (Shikdar et al.
2003). Data resulting from thoracic posture needs to be collected and analyzed to
better predict potential ergonomic problems.

Collection and Monitoring of Physiological Data

Commercially available physiological status monitoring (PSM) systems have
demonstrated their ability to reliably collect physiological properties of people in
outdoor environments (Gatti et al. 2011). However, many of these devices are
incapable of tracking a person’s location while collecting physiological data. Due to
this, many researchers have attempted to integrate real-time location tracking
technology such as Ultra-Wideband (UWB) systems to supplement physiological data
collection systems (Cheng et al. 2012). Construction worker ergonomics has also
been monitored and analyzed in an attempt to predict work-related musculoskeletal
injuries during construction activities (Schneider and Susi 1994, Spielholz et al. 1998,
Van der Molen et al. 2009).

Research Needs Statement

Construction workers are often required to complete repetitive tasks (Gillen et
al. 2002) and sometimes sedimentary conditions which often prevent construction
workers from participating in healthy activities during their workday. A need exists
for scientific evaluation data of remote physiological monitoring systems on active
construction sites for construction operators (Cheng et al. 2012). Specifically,
physiological properties including heart rate, heart rate variability, breathing rate,
body posture, body traveling speed and body acceleration should be collected and
analyzed from construction operators. A framework for measurement and assessment
of these metrics should be created and implemented on active construction sites.

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2016

 Construction Research Congress 2016 2949

METHODOLOGY
Two construction equipment operators were made to put on physiological
status monitoring devices for a five-day period on an active construction excavation
site. The physiological status monitoring system collected data concerning the
identified physiological properties.

Physiological Properties and Metrics

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by U OF ALA LIB/SERIALS on 06/12/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The physiological properties of the construction equipment operators selected

to be measured during the experimental trials were: 1) heart rate, 2) breathing rate, 3)
body posture, 4) body speed, and 5) body acceleration. These metrics were selected
based on their perceived ability to predict a person’s health status as well as the
feasibility of collecting reliable data using automated methods. Table 1 shows the
definition and units of measure for each physiological metric.

Table 1: Worker Physiological Metrics and Information (AHA, 2015)

Metric Definition Unit
Heart rate Number of heart pulses a worker Heart beats per minute
experiences per minute (BPM)
Breathing Number of breaths a worker experiences per Breaths per minute (BPM)
rate minute
Body Degree of angle measured from a perfectly Degree (°)
posture vertical torso
Body speed Distance traveled by the human body per Meters per second (m/s)
unit time
Body Rate of increase of speed of a worker’s Gravitational acceleration
acceleration body movement (G or Nm2/s2)

The worker’s body position was defined as the angle between the actual body
angle and a vertical and upright body torso. Figure 1 illustrates the definitions of
worker’s body angle, which provided the body angle position.

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2016

 Construction Research Congress 2016 2950
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by U OF ALA LIB/SERIALS on 06/12/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figu
ure 1: Workeer's Body Poosture Anglees
ysiological Monitoring
M System
A physsiological monitoring
m system
s was selected too record phhysiological
operties of construction
c equipment operators. Figure 2 shhows the phhysiological
nitoring commponents thaat include a body
b attachm
ment strap, ccentral sensiing unit and
ation trackinng device thhat utilizes Global
G Posittioning Systtem (GPS) ttechnology.
e GPS track king devicee is connectted with thee central seensing unit to provide
ysiological data
d with loccation-based d data, whichh makes the measuremeent of speed
d accelerationn also possib
ble.
Figure 2 also shows how eaach of the componentss was attacched to the
erator’s bodyy during the research. A compressionn shirt was uused to carryy the central
nsing unit thaat needs to be
b close eno ough to the wworker’s heaart. The GPS S unit could
placed in thee worker’s pocket or at any
a location near his boddy.

gure 2: Physsiological Monitoring

M Sy
ystem Compponents and O
Operator Coonfiguration

ta Collection Methods
Two maale operatorss on an activve constructiion site were selected too put on the
ysiological monitoring
m system
s for five
f consecuutive days duuring their ttime on the
e. Each equipment operrator wore hish own deviices and retuurned the devices at the
d of each workday for thet physiolo ogical data tto be downlloaded and the devices
harged. Bothh equipmentt operators wore
w the deviices at all tim
mes on the cconstruction
e whether thhey were wo orking, eatin
ng, or takingg a break. D Detailed infoormation off
ch equipmentt operator is shown in Taable 2.

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2016

 Construction Research Congress 2016 2951

Table 2: Bio data of equipment operators

Bio data Operator A Operator B
Age 36 years 31 years
Ethnicity Caucasian African American
Gender Male Male
Height 1.85 meters (6 feet 1 inch) 1.73 meters (5 feet 8 inches)
Weight 118 kilograms (260 pounds) 65.7 kilograms (145 pounds)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by U OF ALA LIB/SERIALS on 06/12/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Labor type Bulldozer driver Excavator driver

RESULTS
The data analysis of each metric collected from the equipment operators over
a five-day period is presented in this section. Analyzed results of this data collection
effort provided insight to health considerations for the construction operators.

Heart Rate
Table 3 presents a summary of average heart rates for each operator
segmented by daily activities. The highest heart rate by each worker was experienced
when participating in morning work and afternoon work. The lowest heart rate for
both workers was recorded during lunch and rest time.

Table 3: Average Worker Heart Rate and Heart Rate Variability by Activity
Heart Rate Averages (BPM) Heart Rate Variability (Unitless)
Activity
Operator A Operator B Operator A Operator B
Daily overall 88.86 96.08 97.11 116.76
Morning work 102.97 93.97 101.8 85.83
Lunch & Rest 85.02 92.39 80.71 107.3
Afternoon work 87.52 105.3 146.58 123.31

Table 3 also shows the average heart rate variability measured for each worker
during various daily activities. Operator A has BMI of 34.3, which categorizes him as
an obese person. This could explain the daily overall HRV of operator A was lower
than operator B who scored at a normal BMI level. Table 4 shows that the heart rate
variability of both workers was larger in the afternoon than in the morning or at
lunchtime. This can be attributed to the increased fatigue of workers in the afternoon
as well as additional stress to accomplish a task (Blascovich et al. 1993).

Breathing Rate
Table 4 presents a breakdown of average breathing rate for each worker. The
research team suggested that operator B complete a medical exam due to his
measured low breathing rates, for his safety and the safety of others on site. Operator
A experienced a more stable cardiac rate when compared to operator B due to a faster
breathing rate (Sroufe 1971). Operator A had normal breathing rates with the lowest
rate during his lunch break due to the low intensity of physical activity during this
time.

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2016

 Construction Research Congress 2016 2952

Table 4: Average Equipment Operator Breathing Rate by Activity

Breathing Rate Averages (BPM)
Activity
Operator A Operator B
Daily overall 13.30 11.17
Morning work 14.05 11.17
Lunch & Rest 12.88 11.50
Afternoon work 13.33 10.62
Body Posture
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by U OF ALA LIB/SERIALS on 06/12/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Satisfactory body posture is defined as a condition in which the center of

gravity of each body segment is placed vertically above the segment below (Watson
and Donncha 2000). Measurement standards used for this research identify a healthier
body posture as upper body angles closest to zero. Table 5 provides the average body
posture angles for both participant equipment operators. The results indicate that each
operator spent most of the time leaning forward and facing downward according to
the positive average upper body posture over the five consecutive days. Because the
two operators were seated in equipment cabins high above the construction site
surface, both men tended to lean forward to improve their visibility around the piece
of equipment they were operating. The average body posture angle of operator B was
higher than operator A, indicating that operator A was practicing healthier body
posture during construction operations. The excavator equipment cabin that housed
operator B was higher from the ground surface than the dozer equipment cabin which
housed operator A.

Table 5: Average Equipment Operator Body Posture Angle by Activity

Posture Angle (°)
Activity
Operator A Operator B
Daily overall 13.31 26.03
Morning work 15.42 28.13
Lunch & Rest 8.83 9.30
Afternoon work 13.77 24.12
Body Speed
During the work time, the operator’s body speed is equal to the speed of the
equipment. The speed for each operator was calculated every minute by assessing the
distance traveled per individual time period for that travel distance. Table 6 shows the
body speeds of both equipment operators for each activity.

Table 6: Average Equipment Operator’s Speed and Acceleration by Activity

Speed (m/s) Body Acceleration (Nm2/s2)
Activity
Operator A Operator B Operator A Operator B
Daily overall 0.56 0.85 0.4 0.19
Morning work 0.63 0.82 0.42 0.2
Lunch & Rest 0.37 0.34 0.33 0.18
Afternoon work 0.6 1.91 0.42 0.2

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2016

 Construction Research Congress 2016 2953

Body Acceleration
By calculating the vector sum of three-dimensional accelerations in real time,
each operator’s body acceleration was tabulated and recorded each day. The linear
relationship between body acceleration and energy expenditure indicates both
operators expended the minimal amount of energy while working or taking lunch
breaks according to the low average body acceleration shown in Table 6 (Meijer et al.
1989). The maximum amount of body acceleration was experienced for both
operators when they were working. Operator A’s average acceleration value is larger
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by U OF ALA LIB/SERIALS on 06/12/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

than operator B’s, which could be explained by different operation patterns or

equipment functions between the dozer and excavator.
Physiological Monitoring System Validation
The heart rate, breathing rate and body posture were selected to validate the
physiological monitoring system. These metrics were selected because of the
available validation methods. The accuracy of the heart rate, breathing rate and body
postures recorded by the system was determined by calculating the percentage error
between theoretical and experimental values.
To assess the validity of the heart rate measurements, ten independent trials
were conducted to obtain theoretical values by a test person manually recording his
heart pulse every minute for a ten-minute duration. The same method was applied to
the validation of breathing rates by manually counting the breaths taken by the test
person over a ten-minute period for ten trials. The percentage errors between the
manually observed data when compared with the data automatically generated from
the physiological monitoring system were found to be between 0 to 7.7% (i.e. less
than 10%).
The validity of body posture measurements was also evaluated. Trials were
conducted by placing the physiological monitoring device on stationary objects with
no human interaction at the following posture angles: 1) 00, -900, and +900. Each trial
was conducted for ten minutes while the physiological monitoring system
automatically recorded the device posture angle. The percent error obtained ranged
from 1.1 to 4%.
CONCLUSIONS
This research quantified and analyzed collected construction equipment
operator physiological data. A person’s heart rate can be correlated with
environmental conditions including noise exposure, temperature, physical activity and
high working stress. The research results identified that the highest heart rate by each
operator was recorded during morning and afternoon work while a significant
decrease in heart rate was experienced during the daily lunch break. Operator A, who
exhibited obesity conditions based on his high BMI, experienced a lower overall
HRV when compared with operator B who had a normal BMI. This result is in
conformity with other research that obese people typically have attenuated HRV
which is unhealthy (CDC 2015).
Operator A had an overall faster breathing rate which indicates a more stable
cardiac rate when compared to operator B. Both operators displayed low breathing
rates during the lunch break due to the low intensity of physical activity when
compared with other parts of their workday. Operator B was observed to be
susceptible to Bradypnea during his working activities.

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2016

 Construction Research Congress 2016 2954

The results also show that both equipment operators had positive average
body postures which means that they were bending forward most of the day. It was
concluded that working conditions compelled them to sit forward in order to increase
their visibility around the equipment cabin. Greater part of both operators’ unhealthy
body postures occurred during working times.
The research findings indicate that physiological data can be automatically
recorded and analyzed to assess construction equipment operator’s health. The main
contributions of this research include a prescribed framework for assessing and
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by U OF ALA LIB/SERIALS on 06/12/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

evaluating the physiological properties of construction workers. The research

experienced some limitations including an inability to validate worker speed and
acceleration metrics. Additionally, the operating activities during the study could
have smaller intervals thus improving the precision (e.g. recording every hour of
worker activity). Future research could include women and other underrepresented
groups to more accurately portray the diverse culture of a construction worker
population. To improve the statistical significance of the study, more workers could
be measured over a longer duration.
REFERENCES
Acharya, R., Kannathal, N., and Krishnan, S. (2004). “Comprehensive analysis of
cardiac health using heart rate signals.” Physiological Measurement, 25(5),
1139.
American Heart of Association (AHA). (2015). “All about heart rate (pulse)”
American Heart of Association,
http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/Conditions/More/MyHeartandStrokeNews
/All-About-Heart-Rate-Pulse_UCM_438850_Article.jsp > (July 30, 2015).
Arditi, D., Ayrancioglu, M., and Jingsheng Shi, J. (2005). “Worker safety issues in
night-time highway construction.” Engineering, Construction and
Architectural Management, 12(5), 487-501.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2015). “Assessing your weight.”
Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity,
<http://www.cdc.gov/healthyweight/assessing/bmi/adult_bmi/index.html>
(May. 15, 2015).
Cheng, T., Migliaccio, G., Teizer, J., and Gatti, U. (2012). “Data fusion of real-time
location sensing and physiological status monitoring for ergonomics analysis
of construction workers.” Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering.
Cretikos, M., Bellomo, R., Hillman, K., Chen, J., Finfer, S., and Flabouris, A. (2008).
“Respiratory rate: the neglected vital sign.” Medical Journal of Australia,
188(11), 657.
David, G. (2005). “Ergonomic methods for assessing exposure to risk factors for
work-related musculoskeletal disorders.” Occupational Medicine, 55(3), 190-
199.
Gatti, U., Migliaccio, G., Schneider, S. (2011). “Wearable physiological status
monitors for measuring and evaluating worker’s physical strain.” 2011 ASCE
Workshop of Computing in Civil Engineering, ASCE, Reston, VA, 24.
Gillen, M., Baltz, D., Gassel, M., Kirsch, L. and Vaccaro, D. (2002). “Perceived
safety climate, job demands, and coworker support among union and

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2016

 Construction Research Congress 2016 2955

nonunion injured construction workers.” Journal of Safety Research, 33(1),

33-51.
Hallowell, M. Hinze, J., Baud, K. and Wehle, A. (2013). “Proactive construction
safety control: Measuring, monitoring, and responding to safety leading
indicators.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(10).
Hinze, J., Thurman, S., and Wehle, A. (2013). “Leading indicators of construction
safety performance.” Safety Science, 51(1), 23-28.
Hjortskov, N., Rissen, D., Blangsted, A., Fallentin, N., Lundberg, U., and Sogaard, K.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by U OF ALA LIB/SERIALS on 06/12/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(2004). “The effect of mental stress on heart rate variability and blood
pressure during computer work.” European Journal of Applied Physiology,
92(1), 84-89.
Kantor, L., Endler, N., Heslegrave, R., Kocovski, N. (2001). “Validating self-report
measures of state and trait anxiety against a physiological measure.” Current
Psychology, 20(3), 207-215.
Kristal-Boneh, E., Silber, H., Harari, G., & Froom, P. (2000). “The association of
resting heart rate with cardiovascular, cancer and all-cause mortality.”
European Heart Journal, 21(2), 116-124.
Lusk, S., Gillespie, B., Hagerty, B., and Ziemba, R. (2004). “Acute effects of noise on
blood pressure and heart rate.” Archives of Environmental Health: An
International Journal, 59(8), 392-399.
Magari, S., Hauser, R., Schwartz, J., Williams, P., Smith, T., and Christiani, D.
(2001). “Association of heart rate variability with occupational and
environmental exposure to particulate air pollution.” Circulation, 104(9), 986-
991.
Marx, A., and Hootegem, G. (2007). “Comparative configurational case analysis of
ergonomic injuries.” Journal of Business Research, 60(5), 522-530.
Meijer, G., Westerterp, K., Koper, H. (1989). “Department of Human Biology,
University of Limburg, The Netherlands.” Medicine and Science in Sports and
Exercise, 21(3), 343-347.
Overdyk, F., Carter, R., Maddox, R., Callura, J., Herrin, A. and Henriquez, C. (2007).
“Continuous oximetry/capnometry monitoring reveals frequent desaturation
and bradypnea during patient-controlled analgesia.” Anesthesia & Analgesia,
105(2), 412-418.
Sarkin J., Nichols J., Sallis J. and Calfas K. (2000). “Self-report measures and scoring
protocols affect prevalence estimates of meeting physical activity guidelines.”
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 32(1), 149-56.
Sawacha, E., Naoum, S. and Fong, D. (1999). “Factors affecting safety performance
on construction sites.” International journal of project management, 17(5),
309-315.
Schneider, S., and Susi, P. (1994). “Ergonomics and construction: a review of
potential hazards in new construction.” American Industrial Hygiene
Association, 55(7), 635-649.
Shikdar, A. and Sawaqed, N. M. (2003). “Worker productivity, and occupational
health and safety issues in selected industries.” Computers & industrial
engineering, 45(4), 563-572.

© ASCE

Construction Research Congress 2016

 Construction Research Congress 2016 2956

Spielholz, P., Wiker, S. F. and Silverstein, B. (1998). “An ergonomic characterization

of work in concrete form construction.” American Industrial Hygiene
Association, 59(9), 629-635.
Sroufe, L. (1971). “Effects of depth and rate of breathing on heart rate and heart rate
variability.” Psychophysiology, 8(5), 648-655.
Taelman, J., Vandeput, S., Spaepen, A. and Van Huffel, S. (2009). “Influence of
mental stress on heart rate and heart rate variability.” 4th European
Conference of the International Federation for Medical and Biological
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by U OF ALA LIB/SERIALS on 06/12/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Engineering, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1366-1369.

Thayer, J., Yamamoto, S. and & Brosschot, J. F. (2010). “The relationship of
autonomic imbalance, heart rate variability and cardiovascular disease risk
factors.” International Journal of Cardiology, 141(2), 122-131.
Van der Molen, H., Sluiter, J. and Frings-Dresen, M. (2009). “The use of ergonomic
measures and musculoskeletal complaints among carpenters and pavers in a
4.5-year follow-up study.” Ergonomics, 52(8), 954-963.
Watson, A. and Donncha, C. (2000). “A reliable technique for the assessment of
posture: Assessment criteria for aspects of posture.” Journal of Sports
Medicine and Physical Fitness, 40 (3): 260-70.

© ASCE

View publication stats Construction Research Congress 2016