Advertisement

A Comparative Study of Augmented Reality Assistant Tools in Assembly

  • Lea DalingEmail author
  • Anas Abdelrazeq
  • Christoph Sauerborn
  • Frank Hees
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 972)

Abstract

Digital learning formats using Augmented Reality (AR) technologies have already been successfully used in industry. AR opens new possibilities to guide employees systematically through assembly processes, ensuring the practical relevance of the learning content and a saving of time in the learning process. In order to enhance this technology’s acceptance, user-centred designed AR applications are crucial. This paper aims at deriving conclusions on the usability of AR Head Mounted Displays (HMD) in the field of production. As the transferability of lab-based usability studies is still lacking, we conducted a mixed method approach in a laboratory as well as a field setting. This paper presents the current state of the art, the development of the AR applications and the main results of the study.

Keywords

Augmented Reality Head Mounted Displays On the job training Assembly processes Industry 4.0 

References

  1. 1.
    Ahrens, D., Spöttl, G.: Die Vision Industrie 4.0 und ihre sozialen Herausforderungen: Digitalisierung industrieller Arbeit. In: Hirsch-Kreinsen, H., Ittermann, P., Niehaus, J. (eds.) p. 184. Nomos, Baden-Baden (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schuh, G., Gartzen, T., Rodenhauser, T., Marks, A.: Promoting work-based learning through industry 4.0. Procedia CIRP 32, 82–87 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Guo, Q.: Learning in a mixed reality system in the context of industry 4.0. J. Tech. Educ. 3, 92–115 (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Funk, M., Kosch, T., Schmidt, A.: Interactive worker assistance. In: Lukowicz, P., Krüger, A., Bulling, A., Lim, Y.-K., Patel, S.N. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing - UbiComp 2016, pp. 934–939. ACM Press, New York (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Werrlich, S., Austino, D., Ginger, A., Nguyen, P.-A., Notni, G.: Comparing HMD-based and paper-based training. In: 2018 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), pp. 134–142. IEEE, Munich (2018)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tang, A., Owen, C., Biocca, F., Mou, W.: Comparative effectiveness of augmented reality in object assembly. In: Cockton, G., Korhonen, P. (eds.) Proceedings of the conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI 2003, pp. 73–80 ACM Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dey, A., Billinghurst, M., Lindeman, R.W., Swan, J.E.: A systematic review of 10 years of augmented reality usability studies: 2005 to 2014. Front. Robot. AI 5, 161 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Webel, S., Bockholt, U., Engelke, T., Gavish, N., Tecchia, F.: Recent trends of mobile collaborative augmented reality systems. In: Alem, L., Huang, W. (eds.) pp. 69–82. Springer, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang, X., Ong, S.K., Nee, A.Y.C.: A comprehensive survey of augmented reality assembly research. Adv. Manuf. 1(4), 1–22 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Akçayır, M., Akçayır, G.: Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: a systematic review of literature. Educ. Res. Rev. 20, 1–11 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Daling, L., Abdelrazeq, A., Haberstroh, M., Hees, F.: Usability evaluation of augmented reality as instructional tool in collaborative assembly cells. In: The Twelfth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions (ACHI 2019). IARIA (2019, in press)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tümler, J., Doil, F., Mecke, R., Paul, G., Schenk, M., Pfister, E.A., et al.: Mobile augmented reality in industrial applications: approaches for solution of user-related issues. In: 7th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality, pp. 87–90. IEEE, Cambridge (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nielsen, J.: Enhancing the explanatory power of usability heuristics. In: Adelson, B. (eds.) Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 152–158. ACM, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Abdelrazeq, A., Shehadeh, M., Schroeder, S., Richert, A., Jeschke, S.: A development kit for augmented reality applications in healthcare. In: Proceedings of IASTEM International Conference (2017)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chiu, P.-H., Tseng, P.-H., Feng, K.-T.: Cloud computing based mobile augmented reality interactive system. In: IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), pp. 3320–3225. IEEE, Piscataway (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Field, A., Hole, G.: How to Design and Report Experiments. Sage, Los Angeles (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sarodnick, F., Brau, H.: Methoden der Usability Evaluation: Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen und praktische Anwendung. Huber, Bern (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beier, G.: Kontrollüberzeugungen im Umgang mit Technik. Ein Persönlichkeitsmerkmal mit Relevanz für die Gestaltung technischer Systeme. Zugl.: Berlin, Humboldt-Univ., Diss., dissertation.de, Berlin (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hart, S.G.: Nasa-task load index (NASA-ZLX); 20 years later. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 50, 904–908 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Davis, F.D.: A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: theory and results. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1985)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Minge, M., Thüring, M., Wagner, I., Kuhr, C.V.: The meCUE questionnaire: a modular tool for measuring user experience. In: Advances in Ergonomics Modeling, Usability and Special Populations, pp. 115–228. Springer, Cham (2017)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Figl, K.: ISONORM 9241/10 und Isometrics: Usability-Fragebögen im Vergleich. In: Wandke, H., Kain, S., Struve, D. (eds.) Mensch & Computer 2009: Grenzenlos frei!?, pp. 143–152. Oldenbourg, Munich (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lea Daling
    • 1
    Email author
  • Anas Abdelrazeq
    • 1
  • Christoph Sauerborn
    • 2
  • Frank Hees
    • 1
  1. 1.IMA & IfURWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany
  2. 2.RWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations