Limits to the integration of a PAD

In the same framework as integration issues, PADs (Physical Assistance Devices) can present limitations in their integration; this is why an adapted approach is essential to work on these limitations, and especially to consider them before any integration.

The analysis of the request carried out upstream already makes it possible to take into consideration the obstacles which the ergonomist may come up against in the context of the implementation of a DAP: unsuitable activity, too narrow an environment, poor experience of operators on an exoskeleton presentation in the past, too rigid a framework for integration, etc. These are points which need to be explored in order to gain an understanding of the difficulties which may arise in a DAP integration project, and which may in some cases be resolved and in others not.

A PAD is not made to respond to all tasks, unless we speak of « handling » in a generic sense, not all of them provide the same type of assistance, so it is important to study the activity upstream and in real life to understand what type of handling we are dealing with. This limit in the integration of a PAD can also be overcome by informing or training the actors in the companies, in order to make them aware of PAD in general, but also to allow them to recognise these particular situations and identify them, and thus guide the ergonomists in their analysis of the activity.

Enterprise:
Enedis
Job:
TST HTA
PAD:
Plum' spécifique aux travaux de bras en hauteur
Enterprise:
Les poteries d'Albi
Job:
Émailleur
PAD:
Light spécifique aux manutentions répétitives

Once the exoskeleton has been implemented in a work activity with a group of operators, this does not mean that it can be systematically implemented for all activities that are very similar, or even « identical », in terms of the tasks to be performed. A project of this type requires, on the one hand, that the social construction of the intervention favours exchanges between all the actors of the project, and, on the other hand, that the users feel invested in the integration of this PAD. It is then important to keep this logic of integration if we want the products to be « accepted » and integrated into similar activities, with different operators and framework, otherwise it amounts to imposing a product that may not be adapted if it does not pass from « artefact » to « instrument » for the operator.

The limits are numerous and sometimes tacit, but they must be taken into account if integration projects are to succeed. The importance of implementing an ergonomic approach makes it possible to take these limits into account, to study them and to counter them in relation to integration without this type of approach.