手工具是一項歷史悠久、發展成熟的產業，其設計與使用者的操作安全及便利性等人因工程設計原則息息相關，本研究希望以手工具產業作為標的，配合人因工程設計原則進行分析。此外，對於產業分析者而言，專利文件可以提供豐富的資訊以供參考。因此本研究以手工具之專利資訊的角度切入，並藉由人因工程之標準作為依據，對手工具產業進行分析，並透過觀察兩者之間的關係，歸納出新的專利分類方式進行產業分析以提供研發者參考。

本研究利用中華民國專利資料庫檢索手工具當中的螺絲起子相關之發明及新型專利，分析其技術功效後依照過去學術上既有的手工具人因工程設計原則進行分類，若有無法分類之專利，則按其技術功效之上位概念創立一新設計原則。最後分析其分類結果，並與國際專利分類號進行比較。

分析結果經彙整後如以下五點：(1)根據分類結果可得知，人因工程設計原則在學術上的理論與實務的發展有所區別。(2) 分類的結果反映了實務上使用者真正的需求以省時、省力、節省空間、安全等為主。(3)人因工程設計原則間的相依性並不明顯，容易將專利文件清楚分類。(4) 人因工程設計原則與國際專利分類號之關聯性大致明確且直觀，顯示人因工程設計原則有不錯的分類準確性。(5) 人因工程設計原則的分類更貼近實務，可成為一項專屬於本領域之產業分析的工具。

Hand tools are an industry with a long history and mature development. Its design is closely related to the ergonomic design principles such as the safety and convenience of users. This research hopes to use the hand tool industry as the target and cooperate with the ergonomic design principles for analysis. In addition, for industry analysts, patent documents can provide a wealth of information for reference. Therefore, this research starts from the perspective of patent information of hand tools, and uses human factors engineering standards as the basis to analyze the opponent tool industry, and by observing the relationship between the two, summarizes a new patent classification method for industry analysis to provide developers with reference.

This research uses the patent database of the Republic of China to search the screwdriver-related inventions and new patents in the hand tools, analyzes its technical effects, and classifies them according to the academic design principles of hand tools in the past. If there are patents that cannot be classified, then create a new design principle based on the superior concept of its technical efficacy. Finally, the classification results are analyzed and compared with the international patent classification numbers.

The analysis results are summarized as the following five points: (1) According to the classification results, it can be known that the development of ergonomic design principles in academic theory and practice is different. (2) The results of the classification reflect the real needs of users in practice to save time, effort, space, and safety. (3) The interdependence between ergonomic design principles is not obvious, and it is easy to clearly classify patent documents. (4) The correlation between ergonomic design principles and international patent classification numbers is roughly clear and intuitive, showing that ergonomic design principles have good classification accuracy. (5) The classification of ergonomic design principles is closer to practice, and can become a tool for industry analysis exclusively in this field.

中文文獻
1. 王明揚、石裕川、呂志維、李再長、汪孝慈、林久翔、林彥輝、林迪意、紀佳芬、郭輝明、黃雪玲 & 趙金榮導讀(2017)。Human Factors in Engineering and Design 人因工程。台北市：麥格羅希爾。
2. 何正斌、邱啟銘 & 林瓊慧(2007)。充電式電動手工具把手位置之作業績效分析。人因工程學刊，9(1)，39-45。
3. 何應欽編譯(2015)。作業管理。台北市：麥格羅希爾。
4. 吳志富、林楷潔、楊朝陽 & 廖淑芬(2016)。以螺絲起子探討不同類型手工具對於通用設計量表之影響研究。設計學報(Journal of Design)，21(4)，25-43。
5. 阮明淑 & 梁峻齊(2009)。專利指標發展研究。圖書館學與資訊科學，35（2）：88–106。
6. 洪雪娟(2020)。金屬製品產業年鑑─手工具篇。財團法人金屬工業研究發展中心。
7. 胡瑞軒(2017)。應用日本專利分類系統於技術功效矩陣之建構--以自行車產業為例。國立臺灣科技大學。
8. 財政部關務署，海關進出口統計。檢自：https://portal.sw.nat.gov.tw/
APGA/GA30
9. 高隆慶(2021)。半監督式專利學習與特徵功效分類 -以功率二極體為例。國立臺北大學。
10. 張棕堡(2018)。導入人因工程技術之直升機飛行中環境顯示裝置之創新設計。國立勤益科技大學。
11. 許耀華(2004)。專利分類系統及其應用。智慧財產月刊第68期。經濟部智慧財產局。
12. 郭承亮、巫立群、林柏森 & 郭庭安(2011)。螺絲起子握柄設計對手部人因績效之評估。中華科技大學學報，(48)，83-99。
13. 陳國軒(2020)。大型互動電子白板手寫筆之使用性與生物力學評估。國立臺灣科技大學。
14. 陳琳琍(2020)。以人因工程觀點探討某汽車製造廠員工之不良姿勢改善關鍵因素。中山醫學大學。
15. 陳達仁、黃慕萱(2018)。專利資訊檢索、分析與策略。華泰文化。
16. 智慧財產局年報(2010-2019)。經濟部智慧財產局。
17. 黃子珂(2011)。結合萃思以及IPC分類來分析專利的研究架構-以鋰電池專利為例。元智大學。
18. 經濟部統計處，工業產銷存動態產品統計。檢自：https://dmz26.moea.go
v.tw/GMWeb/investigate/InvestigateDA.aspx
19. 劉國讚(2018)。國際專利分析與佈局。元照出版公司。
20. 羅以誠(2013)。台灣新型專利申請策略類型:以集群分析作為分類方法。國立屏東科技大學。
英文文獻
1. Aptel, M., Claudon, L., & Marsot, J. (2002). Integration of ergonomics into hand tool design: principle and presentation of an example. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 8(1), 107-115.
2. Chang, C. H., & Wang, M. J. J. (2000). Evaluating factors that influence hand–arm stress while operating an electric screwdriver. Applied ergonomics, 31(3), 283-289.
3. Chen, Y. L., & Chang, Y. C. (2012). A three-phase method for patent classification. Information Processing & Management, 48(6), 1017-1030.
4. Dianat, I., Rahimi, S., Nedaei, M., Jafarabadi, M. A., & Oskouei, A. E. (2017). Effects of tool handle dimension and workpiece orientation and size on wrist ulnar/radial torque strength, usability and discomfort in a wrench task. Applied ergonomics, 59, 422-430.
5. Dul, J., & Neumann, W. P. (2009). Ergonomics contributions to company strategies. Applied ergonomics, 40(4), 745-752.
6. Fraser, T. M. (1980). Ergonomic principles in the design of hand tools (No. 44). Unipub.
7. International Ergonomics Association.(https://iea.cc/what-is-ergonomics/)
8. Jacob, W.W. (2002). The turn of the screw: The history of Stanley screwdrivers. The Chronicle of the Early American Industries Association, Inc., 55(1), 31-34.
9. Jensen, P. L. (2002). Human factors and ergonomics in the planning of production. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 29(3), 121-131.
10. Johnson, S. L., & Childress, L. J. (1988). Powered screwdriver design and use: tool, task, and operator effects. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 2(3), 183-191.
11. Kadir, B. A., Broberg, O., & da Conceicao, C. S. (2019). Current research and future perspectives on human factors and ergonomics in Industry 4.0. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 137, 106004.
12. Kuijt-Evers, L. F. M., Bosch, T., Huysmans, M. A., De Looze, M. P., & Vink, P. (2007). Association between objective and subjective measurements of comfort and discomfort in hand tools. Applied ergonomics, 38(5), 643-654.
13. Lai, K. K., & Wu, S. J. (2005). Using the patent co-citation approach to establish a new patent classification system. Information processing & management, 41(2), 313-330.
14. Lee, E. C., Rafiq, A., Merrell, R., Ackerman, R., & Dennerlein, J. T. (2005). Ergonomics and human factors in endoscopic surgery: a comparison of manual vs telerobotic simulation systems. Surgical endoscopy and other interventional techniques, 19(8), 1064-1070.
15. Lin, J. H., McGorry, R. W., Chang, C. C., & Dempsey, P. G. (2007). Effects of user experience, working posture and joint hardness on powered nutrunner torque reactions. Ergonomics, 50(6), 859-876.
16. Mark S. Sanders, & Ernest J. McCormick.(1993). Human Factors in Engineering and Design 7/e. New York: McGraw-Hill.
17. Mattila, M., & Landau, K. (1999). Guest. Occupational Ergonomics, 2(3), 135-135.
18. Norman, Donald A.(1988), "Psychology of Everyday Action". The Design of Everyday Things(chap. 2, pp. 52-53). New York: Basic Book.
19. Örtengren, R., Cederqvist, T., Lindberg, M., & Magnusson, B. (1991). Workload in lower arm and shoulder when using manual and powered screwdrivers at different working heights. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 8(3), 225-235.
20. Radwin, R. G., & Haney, J. T. (1996). An ergonomics guide to hand tools. AIHA.
21. Spielholz, P., Bao, S., & Howard, N. (2001). A practical method for ergonomic and usability evaluation of hand tools: a comparison of three random orbital sander configurations. Applied occupational and environmental hygiene, 16(11), 1043-1048.
22. Venugopalan, S., & Rai, V. (2015). Topic based classification and pattern identification in patents. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 94, 236-250.
23. Whitfield, David(1989). Human Factors in Engineering and Design. Ergonomics. 32(5), 558.