Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

Analisis Mitigasi Risiko Kesehatan Dan Keselamatan Kerja (K3) Pada Produksi Batu Bata Menggunakan Metode Job Safety Analysis (JSA) Dan House Of Risk (HOR) (Studi Kasus: UD. Sejati) Ulfaturrahmi; Fadhilah, Fitri; Firdaus, Aqfi Nur
Jurnal Industri dan Teknologi Samawa Vol 6 No 2 (2025): EDISI 12
Publisher : Program Studi Teknik Industri Universitas Teknologi Sumbawa

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36761/jitsa.v6i2.6173

Abstract

UD. Sejati is a small business in Nijang Hamlet, Uter Iwes District, Sumbawa Besar, West Nusa Tenggara, which produces 500-1000 red bricks per day. This study aims to analyze the mitigation of occupational health and safety (K3) risks so that work accidents in the production process can be minimized. The study uses two main methods: Job Safety Analysis (JSA) to identify hazards in the work environment and their preventive measures. House of Risk (HOR) focuses on prevention with two stages. HOR 1 assesses potential hazards using (ARP) to determine priority risk agents. HOR 2 designs mitigation for these priority risks. The results of the study with JSA found 16 potential hazards from 15 work activities, such as eye irritation due to rice husk dust, respiratory problems, slipping, and exposure to sparks. Meanwhile, HOR 1 identified 7 priority risks (A15, A13, A5, A14, A8, A12, A7) that require further handling. In HOR 2, 13 mitigation strategies were obtained from 7 main risk agents, with the strategy priority based on the highest ETDk value, namely PA2 at 1283.25. This approach ensures effective and efficient mitigation in reducing OHS risks at UD. Sejati.
Analisis Beban Kerja Fisiologis dan Mental Mahasiswa pada Simulasi Lingkungan Kerja di Laboratorium Ergonomi Menggunakan Pendekatan Macroergonomics Analysis of Structure Firdaus, Aqfi Nur; Yasin, Nurnianingsih A; Daud, Parlan S; Mohamad, Silvana; Bukamo, Richard Renaldy
Jurnal Teknik Industri Terintegrasi (JUTIN) Vol. 8 No. 4 (2025): October
Publisher : LPPM Universitas Pahlawan Tuanku Tambusai

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31004/jutin.v8i4.50881

Abstract

This study analyzes the physiological and mental workload of students in a simulated work environment at the Ergonomics Laboratory using the Macroergonomics Analysis of Structure (MAS) approach. The simulation exposed 21 participants to a combination of grinding machine noise (90 dB) and low lighting (10 Lux) for 40 minutes. The results indicate that the simulated work environment significantly increased physiological workload, evidenced by an increase in pulse rate where 38% of participants exhibited a %CVL above 15% (category "Improvement Required") and two participants even reached the "Heavy" category (>30%). Mentally, 85.7% of participants reported a high to very high workload based on NASA-TLX measurements. MAS analysis identified systemic s between the technological, physical environment, and personnel subsystems as the root cause of the problem. This study recommends improvements, including environmental modifications, task design adjustments, and the implementation of integrated OSH policies to create an ergonomic, healthy, and sustainable work system.
Evaluasi Sistem Kerja berdasarkan Macroergonomic Analysis and Design dengan Integrasi Macroergonomic Analysis of Structure di Gudang PT. Mulia Multi Medika Mohamad, Silvana; Mohamad, Firmansyah; Firdaus, Aqfi Nur; Fais, Moh. Ainul
Jurnal Optimalisasi Vol 11, No 2 (2025): Oktober
Publisher : Universitas Teuku Umar

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35308/jopt.v11i2.13569

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate the work system in the PT. Mulia Multi Medika warehouse using an integrative approach of Macroergonomic Analysis and Design (MEAD) and Macroergonomic Analysis of Structure (MAS). The method stages include: (1) identification of the environment and organizational structure; (2) definition of the work system through SWOT analysis; (3) setting performance expectations and mapping subsystems; (4) ergonomic risk assessment using the Workplace Ergonomic Risk Assessment (WERA) and Job Strain Index (JSI); and (5) analysis of the work environment in the form of temperature and noise. In addition, interviews with managers and workers were conducted to capture subjective perceptions of workload and system effectiveness. The results show that worker 1 has a WERA score of 41 (moderate risk) and a JSI of 18 (high), while worker 2 has a WERA score of 35 (moderate) and a JSI of 6.75 (low). The temperature of 18–22°C and noise of 68–72 dB are still within safe limits. The MEAD–MAS analysis revealed role imbalances and technological limitations. Recommendations for improvement include the use of material handling aids, role redistribution, and continuous evaluation to reduce ergonomic risks while increasing productivity.