IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i21p13959-d954825.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation of Human Work Efficiency in a High-Temperature Thermal-Radiation Environment

Author

Listed:
  • Yingni Zhai

    (School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, No.13 Yanta RD., Xi’an 710055, China
    State Key Laboratory of Green Building in Western China, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, No.13 Yanta RD., Xi’an 710055, China)

  • Xinta Wang

    (School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, No.13 Yanta RD., Xi’an 710055, China)

  • Haobo Niu

    (School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, No.13 Yanta RD., Xi’an 710055, China)

  • Xianglin Wang

    (School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, No.13 Yanta RD., Xi’an 710055, China)

  • Yangwen Nie

    (School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, No.13 Yanta RD., Xi’an 710055, China
    Basic Mechanical Experiment Center, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, No.13 Yanta RD., Xi’an 710055, China)

  • Yanqiu Huang

    (State Key Laboratory of Green Building in Western China, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, No.13 Yanta RD., Xi’an 710055, China
    School of Building Services Science and Engineering, Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, No.13 Yanta RD., Xi’an 710055, China)

Abstract

Work efficiency is not only related to objective cognitive performance, but it is also closely related to subjective psychological feelings. The existing research mostly focuses on the human safety tolerance limit from the physiological perspective, and there are few studies on work efficiency. In order to evaluate the work efficiency of humans in a high-temperature thermal-radiation environment, this paper proposes a method of personnel work efficiencies evaluation based on the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method. In this method, the objective cognitive ability and subjective questionnaire data of human subjects in a thermal-radiation environment were obtained by building a high-temperature thermal-radiation platform, and the ergonomic status score (ESS) was calculated to determine the work efficiency evaluation grade. The results of this study indicate that subjective job satisfaction has a strong influence on work efficiencies. The safe WBGT temperature threshold that can be borne by personnel in a high-temperature thermal-radiation environment is lower than that in a single high-temperature environment. The ergonomic status score decreased significantly with the increase of radiation temperature. When the radiation temperature is 300 °C (WBGT temperature ≥ 33.2 °C), the work should be stopped immediately to ensure the safety and health of personnel. The research results can provide a reference for labor protection in high-temperature working environments.

Suggested Citation

  • Yingni Zhai & Xinta Wang & Haobo Niu & Xianglin Wang & Yangwen Nie & Yanqiu Huang, 2022. "Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation of Human Work Efficiency in a High-Temperature Thermal-Radiation Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-15, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:13959-:d:954825
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/13959/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/13959/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rui-Liang Yang & Lei Liu & Yi-De Zhou, 2015. "Predicted Thermal Sensation Index for the Hot Environment in the Spinning Workshop," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2015, pages 1-8, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:13959-:d:954825. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.