An ECONOMIC AND ERGONOMIC METHOD
for an adequate frequency of cleaning
0
15
30
45
60
75
Equipment
100 M
2
250 M
2
500 M
2
1000 M
2
$
Labour
78 %
SAVING
R45B
Injection/extraction
M
2
Cleaned per working day
Cleaning Agent
77 %
SAVING
75 %
SAVING
68 %
SAVING
In 2009, the CTIP completed for ROTOWASH,
a comparative study on the ergonomics of
cleaning equipment :
Opinion of CTIP: study showed that the cleaning
operators using the ROTOWASH, required much
less force by comparison with regard to the other
equipment tested and cosideration of
musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs).
Minimum costs thanks to :
•
Efficiency of
206
to
372 m²/h
according to ISSA
•
versatility to clean 100% of the dirt
•
extended life of floor coverings
PHASE OF USE OF EQUIPMENT
Equipment
Place of
injury
R45B
R4B
R
30
Rotary Flat
Injection
Extraction
Use of
equipment
Shoulders
+++ +++ +++
+++
+++
3*
3
3
3
9
Elbows
++ ++ ++
++
++
2
2
2
6
6
Wrists
+
+ ++
++
++
1
1
2
6
6
Lumbar
+++ +++ +++
+++
++
3
3
3
3
6
Cervical
++
1
Lower Body
++ ++ ++
++
++
2
2
2
2
2
F :
Frequency of Exposure
C :
Levelof Forceon body
Very rarely
/
Rarely
1
+
Slightly constraining
1
frequently
2
++
Fairly constraining
2
Consistently
3
+++
Strongly constraining
3
Note
:
Explanation of the calculation of the results
*
T
he numbers appearing in these cells is the result of the multiplication of two factors
R =
Frequency of Exposure
x
Level of Force on the body
Conclusion: the
greater
the number of R, the higher the risk of MSD
S
rotowash
