Advertisement

Comparison of Different Assembly Assistance Systems Under Ergonomic and Economic Aspects

  • Sven BendziochEmail author
  • Dominic Bläsing
  • Sven Hinrichsen
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1026)

Abstract

More and more complex products are being fitted in small batches in manual assembly. Because of this, more information needs to be collected from employees and implemented in appropriate actions. At the same time, the informational design of assembly systems often shows deficits in operational practice. Manual assembly processes can be made more economical, reliable, and human-oriented with the help of informational assistance systems. Testing was carried out in the Laboratory for Industrial Engineering at the Ostwestfalen-Lippe University of Applied Sciences and Arts to verify this potential. Initial results on the use of augmented reality (AR) glasses in comparison to providing information in a paper-based format are presented.

Keywords

Worker assistance system Manual assembly Human-machine interaction Informational complexity 

Notes

Acknowledgment

The authors acknowledge the financial support by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research of Germany (BMBF) and the European Social Fund (ESF) in the project Montexas4.0 (FKZ Grant no. 02L15A260 and 02L15A261).

References

  1. 1.
    Hinrichsen, S., Bendzioch, S.: How digital assistance systems improve work productivity in assembly. In: Nunes, I.L. (ed.) Advances in Human Factors and Systems Interaction. AHFE 2018, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol. 781, pp. 332–342. Springer, Cham (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bächler, A., Bächler, L., Autenrieth, S., Kurtz, P., Heidenreich, T., Hörz, T., Krüll, G.: Entwicklung von Assistenzsystemen für manuelle Industrieprozesse. In: Rathmayer, S., Pongratz, H. (eds.) Proceedings of DeLFI Workshops 2015, pp. 56–63. CEUR-Workshop, München (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Haller, E., Heer, O., Schiller, E.F.: Innovation in Organisation schafft Wettbewerbsvorteile – Im DaimlerChrysler-Werk Rastatt steht auch bei der A-Klasse-Produktion die Gruppenarbeit im Mittelpunkt. FB/IE 48(1), 8–17 (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Müller, R., Vette, M., Mailahn, O., Ginschel, A., Ball, J.: Innovative Produktionsassistenz für die Montage. In: wt Werkstattstechnik online 104(9), 552–5650 (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bornewasser, M., Bläsing, D., Hinrichsen, S.: Informatorische Assistenzsysteme in der manuellen Montage: Ein nützliches Werkzeug zur Reduktion mentaler Beanspruchung? Zeitschrift für Arbeitswissenschaft 72(4), 264–275 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hold, P., Ranz, F., Sihn, W.: Konzeption eines MTM-basierten Bewertungsmodells für digitalen Assistenzbedarf in der cyberphysischen Montage. In: Schlick, C.M. (ed.): Megatrend Digitalisierung Potenziale der Arbeits- und Betriebsorganisation, pp. 295–322. GITO mbh Verlag, Berlin (2016)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fast-Berglund, A., Fässberg, T., Hellman, F., Davidsson, A., Stahre, J.: Relations between complexity, quality and cognitive automation in mixed-model assembly. J. Manuf. Syst. 32(3), 449–455 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hollnagel, E.: Information and reasoning in intelligent decision support systems. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 27(5–6), 665–678 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Claeys, A., Hoedt, S., Soete, N., Van Landeghem, H., Cottyn, J.: Framework for evaluating cognitive support in mixed model assembly systems. In: Dolgui, A., Sasiadek, J., Zaremba, M. (eds.) 15th IFAC Symposium on Information Control Problems in Manufacturing (2015). IFAC-PapersOnLine 48(3), 924–929Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hinrichsen, S., Riediger, D., Unrau, A.: Assistance systems in manual assembly. In: Villmer, F.-J., Padoano, E. (eds.) Production Engineering and Management. Proceedings 6th International Conference, Lemgo, pp. 3–14 (2016)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kasselmann, S., Willeke, S.: Technologie Kompendium: Interaktive Assistenzsysteme. http://www.ipri-institute.com/fileadmin/pics/Projekt-Seiten/40ready/Technologie-Kompendium.pdf. Accessed 20 Dec 2018
  12. 12.
    Funk, M., Kosch, T., Schmidt, A.: Interactive worker assistance: comparing the effects of in-situ projection, head-mounted displays, tablet, and paper instructions. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing, UbiComp 2016, Germany, pp. 934–939. ACM, New York (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blattgerste J., Stenge, B., Renner, P., Pfeiffer, T., Essig, K.: Comparing conventional and augmented reality instructions for manual assembly tasks. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments, PETRA 2017, Greece, pp. 75–82. ACM, New York (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kosch, T., Kettner, K., Funk, M., Schmidt, A.: Comparing tactile, auditory, and visual assembly error-feedback for workers with cognitive impairment. In: Proceedings of the 18th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, ASSETS 2016, USA, pp. 53–60. ACM, New York (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schlick, C., Bruder, R., Luczak, H.: Arbeitswissenschaft, 3rd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jeske, T.: Entwicklung einer Methode zur Prognose der Anlernzeit sensumotorischer Tätigkeiten. Industrial Engineering and Ergonomics Band 13. Shaker-Verlag, Aachen (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hart, S.G., Staveland, L.E.: Development of NASA TLX: results of empirical and theoretical research. In: Hancock, P.A., Meshkati, N. (eds.) Human mental workload, pp. 139–183. North Holland Press, Amsterdam (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y., Xu, X.: Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Q. 36(1), 157–178 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fischbach, J.: Determinanten der Technologie- und Prozessakzeptanz im Kontext kooperativer Arbeit. Zeitschrift für Arbeitswissenschaft 73(1), 35–44 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sven Bendzioch
    • 1
    Email author
  • Dominic Bläsing
    • 2
  • Sven Hinrichsen
    • 1
  1. 1.Ostwestfalen-Lippe University of Applied Sciences and ArtsLemgoGermany
  2. 2.University GreifswaldGreifswaldGermany

Personalised recommendations