Mechanic’s Creeper and Portable Toolbox Integration for Faster Automotive Servicing

Abstract

This study explores the development and user acceptability of Mechanic’s Creeper and Portable Toolbox Integration designed to improve efficiency in under-vehicle maintenance, particularly in environments where hydraulic car lifters are unavailable. Traditional methods using mechanical jacks, conventional creepers, or improvised materials such as cardboard often result in ergonomic discomfort, inefficiency, and workflow problems. To address these challenges, the researchers designed a multi-functional device that combines a creeper and tool storage, enabling technicians to access tools conveniently while working under the vehicles. The findings demonstrate that a mechanic’s creeper and portable toolbox integration effectively improves productivity, minimizes physical strain, and optimizes the workplace. Although quality was rated lower than other aspects, it remained at acceptable standards, suggesting possible refinement for heavy-duty applications. Overall, the study concludes that the proposed innovation is a practical, ergonomic, and efficient solution for users, specifically in automotive servicing, especially in resource-limited workshop environments

Introduction

The text presents the development of an integrated Mechanic’s Creeper and Portable Toolbox designed to improve automotive maintenance work, especially in environments where hydraulic car lifters are not available. Traditional methods like mechanical jacks, cardboard sheets, and standalone creepers are described as inefficient, uncomfortable, and time-consuming.

The proposed innovation combines a creeper (for lying and moving under vehicles) with built-in tool storage, allowing mechanics to keep tools within reach while working. This aims to improve workflow efficiency, reduce repeated movement in and out from under vehicles, and enhance ergonomic safety.

The study evaluates the product based on functionality, usability, build quality, and ergonomic design using surveys from automotive students at Cebu Technological University. Results show a highly acceptable overall rating (4.59/5), with ergonomic design scoring the highest. Users reported improved comfort, reduced physical strain, and faster task completion, aligning with lean manufacturing and ergonomic principles.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the discussion of these results suggests that combining mobility and storage into a single unit is a highly effective innovation for automotive servicing. The data confirms that the Integrated Mechanic’s Creeper and Portable Toolbox optimizes space and time, particularly in environments where hydraulic car lifters are unavailable. While the build quality was deemed acceptable, further refinements in material selection and structural reinforcement could enhance the unit’s durability for heavy-duty professional use, a standard step in the iterative product development process (Ulrich & Eppinger, 2012). Overall, the study demonstrates that the prototype is a functional, ergonomic, and user-friendly solution that meets the modern demands of automotive technicians.

References

[1] Abreek-Sarhan, N., Sarhan, B., & Kalichman, L. (2025). Integrating Physical, Psychosocial, and Ergonomic Factors in Human-Work System Design for Educators: A Systematic Review. [2] Afrifa, J. Y., Amoanab, N. J., Dery, F., Naawe, N., Awongo, S. D., Akokre, E. A., & Dorbal, D. D. (2025). Engineering A Locally-Sourced Adjustable Height Mechanical Creeper for Enhanced Automotive Service Ergonomics. African Journal of Applied Research, 11(3), 73-85. [3] Eppinger, S. D., & Ulrich, K. (1995). Product design and development. [4] Gapp, R., Fisher, R., & Kobayashi, K. (2008). Implementing 5S within a Japanese context: an integrated management system. Management decision, 46(4), 565-579. [5] Herold, B. (2023). The evolution of auto mechanics: From cardboard to magic creepers. [6] MUHAMMAD SAIZUL ARIFF BIN SALAHUDIN, S. A. F., & ABDULLAH, B. (2021). MULTI TROLLEY TOOL BOX. [7] Pheasant, S., & Haslegrave, C. (2016). Bodyspace: Anthropometry, ergonomics and the design of work (Third) [8] Punnett, L., Gold, J., Katz, J. N., Gore, R., & Wegman, D. H. (2004). Ergonomic stressors and upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders in automobile manufacturing: a one year follow up study. Occupational and environmental medicine, 61(8), 668-674. [9] Sundar, R., Balaji, A. N., & Kumar, R. S. (2014). A review of Lean Manufacturing implementation techniques. ?

Copyright

Copyright © 2026 Frank Dagondon, Ryan A. Yamson, Christian Benaro, Rommel Pabricante, Reymond Callao, Bon Kevin Awatin, Noel Cabanca, Dr. Mario B. Pardillo. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.