ISO/DTS 16710-1
(Main)Ergonomics methods — Part 1: Feedback method — A method to understand how end users perform their work with machines
Ergonomics methods — Part 1: Feedback method — A method to understand how end users perform their work with machines
Ergonomie — Partie 1: Méthode de retour d'expérience — Méthode permettant de comprendre la manière dont les utilisateurs finaux effectuent leur travail au moyen de machines
General Information
Buy Standard
Standards Content (Sample)
FINAL DRAFT
Technical
Specification
ISO/TC 159/SC 1
Ergonomics methods —
Secretariat: DIN
Part 1:
Voting begins on:
2024-06-26
Feedback method — A method to
understand how end users perform
Voting terminates on:
2024-08-21
their work with machines
Ergonomie —
Partie 1: Méthode de retour d'expérience — Méthode permettant
de comprendre la manière dont les utilisateurs finaux effectuent
leur travail au moyen de machines
This document is circulated as received from the committee secretariat.
RECIPIENTS OF THIS DRAFT ARE INVITED TO SUBMIT,
WITH THEIR COMMENTS, NOTIFICATION OF ANY
RELEVANT PATENT RIGHTS OF WHICH THEY ARE AWARE
AND TO PROVIDE SUPPOR TING DOCUMENTATION.
IN ADDITION TO THEIR EVALUATION AS
BEING ACCEPTABLE FOR INDUSTRIAL, TECHNO-
FAST TRACK PROCEDURE
LOGICAL, COMMERCIAL AND USER PURPOSES, DRAFT
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS MAY ON OCCASION HAVE
TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF THEIR POTENTIAL
TO BECOME STAN DARDS TO WHICH REFERENCE MAY BE
MADE IN NATIONAL REGULATIONS.
Reference number
FINAL DRAFT
Technical
Specification
ISO/TC 159/SC 1
Ergonomics methods —
Secretariat: DIN
Part 1:
Voting begins on:
Feedback method — A method to
understand how end users perform
Voting terminates on:
their work with machines
Ergonomie —
Partie 1: Méthode de retour d'expérience — Méthode permettant
de comprendre la manière dont les utilisateurs finaux effectuent
leur travail au moyen de machines
This document is circulated as received from the committee secretariat.
RECIPIENTS OF THIS DRAFT ARE INVITED TO SUBMIT,
WITH THEIR COMMENTS, NOTIFICATION OF ANY
RELEVANT PATENT RIGHTS OF WHICH THEY ARE AWARE
AND TO PROVIDE SUPPOR TING DOCUMENTATION.
© ISO 2024
IN ADDITION TO THEIR EVALUATION AS
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
BEING ACCEPTABLE FOR INDUSTRIAL, TECHNO-
FAST TRACK PROCEDURE
LOGICAL, COMMERCIAL AND USER PURPOSES, DRAFT
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS MAY ON OCCASION HAVE
the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below
TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF THEIR POTENTIAL
or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
TO BECOME STAN DARDS TO WHICH REFERENCE MAY BE
MADE IN NATIONAL REGULATIONS.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
Email: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland Reference number
ii
Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 General principles . 4
5 Feedback method . 5
5.1 The “Feedback method” steps .5
5.2 Selection of the machine to be investigated .5
5.3 Collection of documentation and preparation of a machine dossier .6
5.4 Identification of companies where the machine is regularly used .6
5.5 Inspection of work places .6
5.6 Feedback Method Work Groups and work analysis with skilled users of the machine.7
5.6.1 Preparation for meetings.7
5.6.2 Work analysis with skilled end-users of the machine.8
5.7 Written report of the Feedback Method Work Group results and their validation .9
5.8 Project overview and final technical report .10
Annex A (informative) Existing results .11
Annex B (informative) Inspection form “Combine Harvester” .15
Annex C (informative) Work phases and tasks/activities “Combine Harvesters” .25
Annex D (informative) Extract from report of the FMWG “Combine Harvester” — Italy .27
Annex E (informative) Extract of recommended amendments to ISO 4254-7:2009 “Agricultural
machinery — Safety — Part 7: Combine harvesters, forage harvesters and cotton
harvesters” from the application of the “Feedback Method” .28
Bibliography .30
iii
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out through
ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical committee
has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International organizations,
governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. ISO collaborates closely
with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are described
in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the different types
of ISO document should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the editorial rules of the
ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
ISO draws attention to the possibility that the implementation of this document may involve the use of (a)
patent(s). ISO takes no position concerning the evidence, validity or applicability of any claimed patent
rights in respect thereof. As of the date of publication of this document, ISO had not received notice of (a)
patent(s) which may be required to implement this document. However, implementers are cautioned that
this may not represent the latest information, which may be obtained from the patent database available at
www.iso.org/patents. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and expressions
related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to the World Trade
Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
This document was prepared by the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) (as CEN/TR 16710-
1:2015) and was adopted without modification other than those given below. It was assigned to Technical
Committee ISO/TC 159, Ergonomics, Subcommittee SC 1, General ergonomics principles, and adopted under
the “fast-track procedure”.
— Source documents for 3.8, 3.18, 3.19 have been updated to ISO 6385:2016.
— Definition 3.16 has been supplemented by Note to Entry 1 to 3.
A list of all parts in the ISO 16710 series can be found on the ISO website.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html.
iv
Introduction
The importance of involving users in the design of machinery is recognized in most standards that deal with
ergonomic design principles. In fact, i.e. EN 614-1 strongly recommends user involvement because it helps to
identify measures and improvements for future design.
CEN Guide 414, ISO 6385, ISO 9241-210 and ISO 12100 also provide for feedback from the end-users of
machinery, and affirm the need to continue monitoring the effect of the system in order to safeguard against
long-term deterioration in the performance or health of the users.
Collecting users’ experiences by reconstructing their activities, how they perform their work in different
real-life operating conditions, will yield knowledge of the problems that emerge from common, everyday
use and help to identify possible corrections and improvements to harmonized technical standards and
machinery design and manufacture.
In the context of machinery safety, it is widely accepted that end-users possess extensive knowledge of
[15]
the equipment they work with every day. Collecting this information as feedback from end-users,
mainly workers, provides a basis not just for improving machinery standards by incorporating ergonomics
[17]
principles, but also for putting standards to work and monitoring their quality over the years. Those who
can benefit from such knowledge include:
— CEN and ISO and national standardization committees and working groups who can become aware of
the problems relating to the real use of specific machine in different work contexts, and will thus be able
to draw up new or to revise existing standards accordingly;
— designers (who are involved in the design or redesign) and manufacturers enabling them to produce
better, more comfortable and safer machines and to provide precise, clear and exhaustive instructions
for use;
— employers/buyers to help them choose the best available machinery on the market;
— the end users, employers, artisans and workers for training purposes and for defining appropriate work
procedures;
— market surveillance, authorities to enhance their knowledge and improve the efficiency of their
interventions;
— the machinery working group (MWG) chaired by the European Commission, whenever they need to
collect further details on machinery design problems tabled during the MWG meetings.
Studies have shown that the “Feedback Method” described in this document has a high level of repeatability,
as demonstrated by the results obtained in many different production contexts in seven different European
member states from applying this method to five CE-marked machines manufactured in conformity with
their specific C-standard (see Annex A).
The full participation and support of employees, employers, users and buyers of machinery, technicians
and market surveillance personnel in putting the “Feedback Method“ into practice is key to its successful
application.
Within these studies, a detailed ergonomic analysis of the work with each machine, involving a number of
work groups, yielded a large body of valuable information on the specific characteristics of machine use in
different work contexts and socio-cultural, climatic and microclimatic environments.
Using the standardized method described in this document, that makes little demand on time and resources,
multiple work groups can easily be set up to collect skilled users’ experiences with a specific machine and to
use this valuable information to:
a) identify failings in the appropriate technical standard or the design rather than in its use;
b) validate the results already obtained;
v
c) monitor improvements in the work activity and the efficacy of the ergonomic and safety solutions
applied.
The outcomes of the method described in this document can also be used for evaluating and/or designing
new machinery similar to the one under study.
EXAMPLE When dealing with the roll-over risk of any self-propelled machinery with a driver on board during use
on uneven or lose ground.
The method can be used by workers’ representatives or, more generally, representatives of consumers
and users, to collect evidence for making improvements to various types of machinery, possibly after
the occurrence of unwanted events during the use of a machine, so as to identify the causes and possible
solutions.
Where appropriate, recommendations can the
...
ISO/TC 159/SC 1
Secretariat: DIN
Date: 2024-06-12
Ergonomics methods —
Part 1:
Feedback method — A method to understand how end users perform
their work with machines
DTS stage
Warning for WDs and CDs
This document is not an ISO International Standard. It is distributed for review and comment. It is subject to change
without notice and may not be referred to as an International Standard.
Recipients of this draft are invited to submit, with their comments, notification of any relevant patent rights of which
they are aware and to provide supporting documentation.
A model manuscript of a draft International Standard (known as “The Rice Model”) is available at Ergonomie —
Partie 1: Méthode de retour d'expérience — Méthode permettant de comprendre la manière dont les
utilisateurs finaux effectuent leur travail au moyen de machines
© ISO #### – All rights reserved
ISO/TS DTS 16710--1:2024(E:(en)
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication
may be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
or posting on the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO
at the address below or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: + 41 22 749 01 11
E-mail: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
iii
ISO/TS DTS 16710--1:2024(E:(en)
Contents
Foreword . v
Introduction . vi
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 General principles . 4
5 Feedback method . 5
5.1 The “Feedback method” steps . 5
5.2 Selection of the machine to be investigated . 6
5.3 Collection of documentation and preparation of a machine dossier . 6
5.4 Identification of companies where the machine is regularly used . 7
5.5 Inspection of work places . 7
5.6 Feedback Method Work Groups and work analysis with skilled users of the machine . 8
5.6.1 Preparation for meetings . 8
5.6.2 Work analysis with skilled end-users of the machine . 8
5.7 Written report of the Feedback Method Work Group results and their validation . 10
5.8 Project overview and final technical report . 11
Annex A (informative) Existing results . 12
Annex B (informative) Inspection form “Combine Harvester” . 16
Annex C (informative) Work phases and tasks/activities “Combine Harvesters” . 26
C.1 Phase 1: Road travel and transport (with mounted cutter bar, or cutter bar trailer) . 26
C.2 Phase 2: Preparation for use, changeover . 26
C.3 Phase 3: Harvesting process . 26
C.4 Phase 4: Maintenance and fault clearance . 26
Annex D (informative) Extract from report of the FMWG “Combine Harvester” — Italy . 28
Annex E (informative) Extract of recommended amendments to ISO 4254-7:2009 “Agricultural
machinery — Safety — Part 7: Combine harvesters, forage harvesters and cotton
harvesters” from the application of the “Feedback Method” . 29
Bibliography . 31
iv
ISO/TS DTS 16710--1:2024(E:(en)
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out through
ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical committee has been
established has the right to be represented on that committee. International organizations, governmental and
non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. ISO collaborates closely with the
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are described
in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the different types of
ISO documentsdocument should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the editorial rules
of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
Field Code Changed
Attention is drawnISO draws attention to the possibility that some of the elementsimplementation of this
document may beinvolve the subjectuse of (a) patent(s). ISO takes no position concerning the evidence,
validity or applicability of any claimed patent rights in respect thereof. As of the date of publication of this
document, ISO had not received notice of (a) patent(s) which may be required to implement this document.
However, implementers are cautioned that this may not represent the latest information, which may be
obtained from the patent database available at www.iso.org/patents. ISO shall not be held responsible for
identifying any or all such patent rights. Details of any patent rights identified during the development of the
document will be in the Introduction and/or on the ISO list of patent declarations received (see ).
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and expressions
related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO’sISO's adherence to the World Trade
Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
Field Code Changed
This document was prepared by the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) (as CEN/TR 16710-
1:2015) and was adopted without modification other than those given below. It was assigned to Technical
Committee ISO/TC 159, Ergonomics, Subcommittee SC 1, General ergonomics principles, and adopted under
the “fast-track procedure”.
— Source documents for 3.8, 3.18, 3.19 have been updated to ISO 6385:2016.
— Definition 3.16 has been supplemented by Note to Entry 1 to 3.
A list of all parts in the ISO 16710 series can be found on the ISO website.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html.
Field Code Changed
The reference of the terms and definitions 3.8, 3.18, 3.19 have been updated to ISO 6385:2016.
Definition 3.16 has been supplemented by Note to Entry 1 to 3.
v
ISO/TS DTS 16710--1:2024(E:(en)
Introduction
The importance of involving users in the design of machinery is recognized in most standards that deal with
ergonomic design principles. In fact, i.e. EN 614--1 strongly recommends user involvement because it helps to
identify measures and improvements for future design.
CEN Guide 414, ISO 6385:2004, ISO 9241--210:2010 and ISO 12100:2010 also provide for feedback from the
end-users of machinery, and affirm the need to continue monitoring the effect of the system in order to
safeguard against long-term deterioration in the performance or health of the users.
Collecting users’ experiences by reconstructing their activities, how they perform their work in different real-
life operating conditions, will yield knowledge of the problems that emerge from common, everyday use and
help to identify possible corrections and improvements to harmonized technical standards and machinery
design and manufacture.
In the context of machinery safety, it is widely accepted that end-users possess extensive knowledge of the
[15]
equipment they work with every day. Collecting this information as feedback from end-users, mainly
workers, provides a basis not just for improving machinery standards by incorporating ergonomics
[17]
principles, but also for putting standards to work and monitoring their quality over the years. Those who
can benefit from such knowledge include:
— CEN and ISO and national standardization committees and working groups who can become aware of the
problems relating to the real use of specific machine in different work contexts, and will thus be able to
draw up new or to revise existing standards accordingly;
— designers (who are involved in the design or redesign) and manufacturers enabling them to produce
better, more comfortable and safer machines and to provide precise, clear and exhaustive instructions for
use;
— employers/buyers to help them choose the best available machinery on the market;
— the end users, employers, artisans and workers for training purposes and for defining appropriate work
procedures;
— market surveillance, authorities to enhance their knowledge and improve the efficiency of their
interventions;
— the machinery working group (MWG) chaired by the European Commission, whenever they need to collect
further details on machinery design problems tabled during the MWG meetings.
Studies have shown that the “Feedback Method” described in this document has a high level of repeatability,
as demonstrated by the results obtained in many different production contexts in seven different European
member states from applying this method to five CE-marked machines manufactured in conformity with their
specific C-standard (see Annex A).
The full participation and support of employees, employers, users and buyers of machinery, technicians and
market surveillance personnel in putting the “Feedback Method“ into practice is key to its successful
application.
Within these studies, a detailed ergonomic analysis of the work with each machine, involving a number of
work groups, yielded a large body of valuable information on the specific characteristics of machine use in
different work contexts and socio-cultural, climatic and microclimatic environments.
vi
ISO/TS DTS 16710--1:2024(E:(en)
Using the standardized method described in this document, that makes little demand on time and resources,
multiple work groups can easily be set up to collect skilled users’ experiences with a specific machine and to
use this valuable information to:
a) identify failings in the appropriate technical standard or the design rather than in its use;
b) validate the results already obtained;
c) monitor improvements in the work activity and the efficacy of the ergonomic and safety solutions applied.
The outcomes of the method described in this document can also be used for evaluating and/or designing new
machinery similar to the one under study.
EXAMPLE When dealing with the roll-over risk of any self-propelled machinery with a driver on board during use
on uneven or lose ground.
The method can be used by workers’ representatives or, more generally, representatives of consumers and
users, to collect evidence for making improvements to various types of machinery, possibly after the
occurrence of unwanted events during the use of a machine, so as to identify the causes and possible solutions.
Where appropriate, recommendations can then be forwarded to the appropriate ISO/IEC Technical
Committees. For example, one important safety recommendation for any revision of ISO 21281 is to
standardize the position of the main foot pedals to avoid the risk of confusion and accidents. Figure 1 shows
the differences in pedal layout identified during the application of the “Feedback Method” to fork-lift trucks.
Right-foot-operated selector
Manual selector of direction. Left-foot-operated selector of Foot-operated selector of
of direction and right-
Right-foot-operated (car- direction. Right-foot- direction and accelerator
foot-operated
like) accelerator. operated accelerator. (both left and right feet).
accelerator.
A = Accelerator
B = Brake and/or approach at reduced speed
C = Clutch coupling (if present) or approach at reduced speed
Figure 1 — Illustration of the various foot pedal layouts identified in different fork-lift trucks
vii
Ergonomics methods —
Part 1:
Feedback meth
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.