Smart Digital Assistance Devices for the Support of Machine Operation Processes at Future Production Workplaces

Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1217)


Digitalization of production changes the scope of human-machine interaction, frequently leading to increasing informational load. The present article describes a study which investigated smart digital assistance (SDA) devices regarding usability, subjective strain, performance and reaction time while conducting a simultaneous machine monitoring and assembly task. Results reveal that subjective mental strain and reaction times were positively affected by means of SDA usage and showed significant differences independent from SDA type. Performance significantly increased when data glasses were used. Significant differences were further shown in usability when using smartwatch compared to data glasses. Findings show that SDA device implementation in industrial practice potentially has a positive benefit for productivity.


Automation Digitalization Human-machine interaction Production workplace Smart digital assistance Wearable devices 



The research was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), Project MaxiMMI, according to Grant No. 16SV6237, supervised by the VDI/VDE Innovation + Technik GmbH. The research is continued within the “Smart Working Environments for all Ages” project, funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program under Grant Agreement N826232. The authors would like to express their gratitude for the support given.


  1. 1.
    Zamfirescu, C.-B., Pirvu, B.-C., Schlick, J., Zuehlke, D.: Preliminary insides for an anthropocentric cyber-physical reference architecture of the smart factory. Stud. Inf. Control 22(3), 269–278 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhou, J.: Digitalization and intelligentization of manufacturing industry. Adv. Manuf. 1(1), 1–7 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pennekamp, J., Glebke, R., Martin, H.: Towards an infrastructure enabling the internet of production. In: Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Cyber Physical Systems (ICPS), pp. 31–37 (2019)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schmitt, M., Meixner, G., Gorecky, D., Seissler, M., Loskyll, M.: Mobile interaction technologies in the factory of the future. IFAC Proc. Vol. 46(15), 536–542 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lanza, G., Haefner, B., Kraemer, A.: Optimization of selective assembly and adaptive manufacturing by means of cyber-physical system based matching. CIRP Ann. 64(1), 399–402 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Spencer, D.: Work in and beyond the second machine age: the politics of production and digital technologies. Work Employ Soc. 31(1), 142–152 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schaupp, E., Abele, E., Metternich, J.: Potentials of digitalization in tool management. Procedia CIRP 63, 144–149 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gorecky, D., Schmitt, M., Loskyll, M., Zuhlke, D.: Human-machine-interaction in the industry 4.0 Era. In: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics (INDIN), Porto Alegre RS, Brazil, pp. 289–294 (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhou, Y., Mu, H., Jiang, J., Zhang, L.: Investigation of the impact of main control room digitalization on operators cognitive reliability in nuclear power plants. Work 41(Suppl. 1), 714–721 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shrouf, F., Ordieres, J., Miragliotta, G.: Smart factories in industry 4.0: a review of the concept and of energy management approached in production based on the internet of things paradigm. In: Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, pp. 697–701 (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gorecky, D., Schmitt, M., Loskyll, M., Zühlke, D.: Human-machine-interaction in the industry 4.0 eraGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hart, S.G., Staveland, L.E.: Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): results of empirical and theoretical research. In: Hancock, P.A., Meshkati, N. (eds.) Advances in Psychology, vol. 52, Human Mental Workload. Amsterdam, New York, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.: North-Holland; Sole distributors for the U.S.A. and Canada, Elsevier Science Pub. Co., pp. 139–183 (1988)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brooke, J.: SUS: a quick and dirty usability scale. In: Jordan, P.W., Thomas, B., Weerdmeester, B.A., McClelland, I.L. (eds.) Usability Evaluation in Industry, pp. 189–194. Taylor & Francis, London (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Industrial Engineering and ErgonomicsRWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations