skip to main content
10.1145/3275116.3275125acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmindtrekConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Human Factors and Ergonomics Evaluation of a Tablet Based Augmented Reality System in Maintenance Work

Published: 10 October 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Augmented reality (AR) technologies start to be mature enough to be used in industrial work settings. However, human factors and ergonomics (HFE) and safety issues have not been considered thoroughly yet. The purpose of this study was to identify what kind of postures users adopt when using a tablet based AR system during a maintenance task. In addition, safety, user experience and user acceptance were studied. Results indicate that the participants adopted varying kind of working postures with the AR system, but none of the postures were severe for the well-being. User experience was positive and user acceptance on a good level. The participants saw some safety concerns related to using the AR system but were mainly concerned if the tablet could be used in the harsh maintenance environments. The findings of this study can be used to improve HFE and safety of AR systems in industrial settings.

References

[1]
Iina Aaltonen, Timo Kuula, Kaj Helin, and Jaakko Karjalainen. 2016. Maintenance Past or Through the Tablet? Examining Tablet Use with AR Guidance System. In Proceedings of European Association for Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality Conference (EuroVR).
[2]
Susanna Aromaa, Iina Aaltonen, Eija Kaasinen, Joona Elo, and Ilari Parkkinen. 2016. Use of Wearable and Augmented Reality Technologies in Industrial Maintenance Work. In Proceedings of the20th International Academic Mindtrek Conference, 235--242.
[3]
Susanna Aromaa, Antti Väätänen, Iina Aaltonen, and Tomi Heimonen. 2015. A model for gathering and sharing knowledge in maintenance work. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the European Association of Cognitive Ergonomics (ECCE '15).
[4]
Rodald Azuma, Yohan Baillot, Reinhold Behringer, Steven Feiner, Simon Julier, and Blair MacIntyre. 2001. Recent Advances in Augmented Reality. Computer Graphics and Applications 21, 6: 34--47.
[5]
Myroslav Bachynskyi, Gregorio Palmas, Antti Oulasvirta, Jürgen Steimle, and Tino Weinkauf. 2015. Performance and Ergonomics of Touch Surfaces: A Comparative Study using Biomechanical Simulation. In Proceedings of the ACM CHI'15 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1817--1826.
[6]
Kevin M. Baird and Woodrow Barfield. 1999. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Augmented Reality Displays for a Manual Assembly Task. Virtual Reality 4: 250--259. Retrieved from http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-071199-152121/unrestricted/thesis.PDF
[7]
John P Chin, Virginia A Diehl, and Kent L Norman. 1988. Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, 213--218.
[8]
Ashley Colley, Tuomas Lappalainen, Elisa Määttänen, Johannes Schöning, and Jonna Häkkilä. 2016. Crouch, Hold and engage: Spatial aspects of augmented reality browsing. In ACM International Conference Proceeding Series.
[9]
Ashley Colley, Wouter Van Vlaenderen, Johannes Schöning, and Jonna Häkkilä. 2016. Changing the camera-to-screen angle to improve AR browser usage. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services - MobileHCI '16, 442--452.
[10]
Francesca De Crescenzio, Massimiliano Fantini, Franco Persiani, Luigi Di Stefano, Pietro Azzari, and Samuele Salti. 2011. Augmented reality for aircraft maintenance training and operations support. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 31, 1: 96--101.
[11]
G C. David. 2005. Ergonomic methods for assessing exposure to risk factors for work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Occupational medicine (Oxford, England) 55, 3: 190--199.
[12]
Fred D. Davis. 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Information Technolog MIS Quarterly 13, 3: 319--340.
[13]
Philip N. Day, Gus Ferguson, Patrik O Brian Holt, Steven Hogg, and David Gibson. 2005. Wearable augmented virtual reality for enhancing information delivery in high precision defence assembly: An engineering case study. Virtual Reality 8, 3: 177--184.
[14]
Ashish Doshi, Ross T. Smith, Bruce H. Thomas, and Con Bouras. 2017. Use of projector based augmented reality to improve manual spot-welding precision and accuracy for automotive manufacturing. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 89, 5--8: 1279--1293.
[15]
European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. 2007. Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs): an introduction.
[16]
Pedro Ferreira and Kristina Höök. 2011. Bodily Orientations A round Mobiles: Lessons L earnt in Vanuatu. In Proceedings of the 2011 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 277--286.
[17]
Markus Funk, Andreas Bächler, Liane Bächler, Thomas Kosch, Thomas Heidenreich, and Albrecht Schmidt. 2017. Working with Augmented Reality? A Long-Term Analysis of In-Situ Instructions at the Assembly Workplace. In 10th International Conference on Pervasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (PETRA).
[18]
Nirit Gavish, Teresa Gutiérrez, Sabine Webel, Jorge Rodríguez, Matteo Peveri, Uli Bockholt, and Franco Tecchia. 2015. Evaluating virtual reality and augmented reality training for industrial maintenance and assembly tasks. Interactive Learning Environments 4820, November 2014: 1--21.
[19]
Steven Henderson and Steven Feiner. 2011. Exploring the benefits of augmented reality documentation for maintenance and repair. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 17, 10: 1355--1368.
[20]
Steven J. Henderson and Steven Feiner. 2009. Evaluating the benefits of augmented reality for task localization in maintenance of an armored personnel carrier turret. In Science and Technology Proceedings - IEEE 2009 International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality, ISMAR 2009, 135--144.
[21]
Sue Hignett and Lynn Mcatamney. 2000. Rapid entire body assessment (REBA). Applied Ergonomics 31: 201--205.
[22]
Kristina Höök, Baptiste Caramiaux, Cumhur Erkut, Jodi Forlizzi, Nassrin Hajinejad, Michael Haller, Caroline Hummels, Katherine Isbister, Martin Jonsson, George Khut, Lian Loke, Danielle Lottridge, Patrizia Marti, Edward Melcer, Florian Müller, Marianne Petersen, Thecla Schiphorst, Elena Segura, Anna Ståhl, Dag Svanæs, Jakob Tholander, and Helena Tobiasson. 2018. Embracing First-Person Perspectives in Soma-Based Design. Informatics 5, 1: 8.
[23]
IEA. 2000. Definition and domains of ergonomics. Retrieved January 15, 2016 from http://www.iea.cc/whats/
[24]
ISO 9241-210. 2010. Human-centred design for interactive system. Geneva.
[25]
Osmo Karhu, Pekka Kansi and Ilkka Kuorinka. 1977. Correcting working posture in industry: a practical method for analysis. Applied Ergonomics 8, December: n. 4, 199--201.
[26]
Steven J. Kerr, Mark D. Rice, G. T. Jackson Lum, and Marcus Wan. 2012. Evaluation of an arm-mounted augmented reality system in an outdoor environment. In 2012 Southeast Asian Network of Ergonomics Societies Conference: Ergonomics Innovations Leveraging User Experience and Sustainability, SEANES 2012.
[27]
Steven J. Kerr, Mark D. Rice, Yinquan Teo, Marcus Wan, Yian L. Cheong, Jamie Ng, Lillian Ng-Thamrin, Thant Thura-Myo, and Dominic Wren. 2011. Wearable mobile Augmented Reality: Evaluating outdoor user experience. In Proceedings of VRCAI 2011: ACM SIGGRAPH Conference on Virtual-Reality Continuum and its Applications to Industry, 209--216.
[28]
Hyungil Kim, Alexandre Miranda Anon, Teruhisa Misu, Nanxiang Li, Ashish Tawari, and Kikuo Fujimura. 2016. Look at Me: Augmented Reality Pedestrian Warning System Using an In-Vehicle Volumetric Head Up Display. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, 294--298.
[29]
Kinam Kim, Hongjo Kim, and Hyoungkwan Kim. 2017. Image-based construction hazard avoidance system using augmented reality in wearable device. Automation in Construction, June: 1-14.
[30]
Oliver Korn, Albrecht Schmidt, and Thomas Hörz. 2013. The potentials of in-situ-projection for augmented workplaces in production. A study with impaired persons. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13), 979--984.
[31]
Steinar Kristoffersen and Fredrik Ljungberg. 1999. "Making Place" to Make IT Work: Empirical Explorations of HCI for Mobile CSCW. In Proceedings of the international ACM SIGGROUP conference on Supporting group work, 276--285.
[32]
Kai Kunze, Florian Wagner, Ersun Kartal, Ernesto Morales Kluge, and Paul Lukowicz. 2009. Does context matter?-A quantitative evaluation in a real world maintenance scenario. Pervasive Computing: 372--389. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-01516-8_25
[33]
Daniel Kurz, Anton Fedosov, Stefan Diewald, Jörg Güttler, Geilhof Barbara, and Heuberger Matthias. 2014. Towards Mobile Augmented Reality for the Elderly. In IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR2014), 275--276. Retrieved from http://da.nielkurz.de/content/publications
[34]
Sotiris Makris, Panagiotis Karagiannis, Spyridon Koukas, and Aleksandros Stereos Matthaiakis. 2016. Augmented reality system for operator support in human-robot collaborative assembly. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology 65, 1: 61--64.
[35]
Lynn McAtamney and E. Nigel Corlett. 1993. RULA: A survey method for the investigation of work-related upper limb disorders. Applied Ergonomics 24, 2: 91--99.
[36]
George Michalos, Panagiotis Karagiannis, Sotiris Makris, Önder Tokçalar, and George Chryssolouris. 2016. Augmented Reality (AR) Applications for Supporting Human-robot Interactive Cooperation. Procedia CIRP 41: 370--375.
[37]
A. Y C Nee, S. K. Ong, G. Chryssolouris, and D. Mourtzis. 2012. Augmented reality applications in design and manufacturing. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology 61, 2: 657--679.
[38]
Riccardo Palmarini, John Ahmet Erkoyuncu, Rajkumar Roy, and Hosein Torabmostaedi. 2018. A systematic review of augmented reality applications in maintenance. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 49, July 2017: 215--228.
[39]
Jarkko Polvi, Takafumi Taketomi, Atsunori Moteki, Toshiyuki Yoshitake, Toshiyuki Fukuoka, Goshiro Yamamoto, Christian Sandor, and Hirokazu Kato. 2018. Handheld Guides in Inspection Tasks: Augmented Reality vs. Picture. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 24, 7: 2118--2128.
[40]
Jesús M. Sánchez, Álvaro Carrera, Carlos Iglesias, and Emilio Serrano. 2016. A participatory agent-based simulation for indoor evacuation supported by Google glass. In Sensors.
[41]
Björn Schwerdtfeger and Gudrun Klinker. 2008. Supporting order picking with augmented reality. In Proceedings - 7th IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality 2008, ISMAR 2008, 91--94.
[42]
Arthur Tang, Charles Owen, Frank Biocca, and Weimin Mou. 2003. Comparative effectiveness of augmented reality in object assembly. Proceedings of the conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI '03, 5: 73--80. Retrieved from http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=642611.642626
[43]
Thomas R. Waters, Vern Putz-Anderson, Arun Garg, and Lawrence J. Fine. 1993. Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks. Ergonomics 36, 7: 749--776.
[44]
Justin G. Young, Matthieu Trudeau, Dan Odell, Kim Marinelli, and Jack T. Dennerlein. 2012. Touch-screen tablet user configurations and case-supported tilt affect head and neck flexion angles. Work 41, 1: 81--91.
[45]
2017. Alvar Tracking SDK. Retrieved from http://virtual.vtt.fi/virtual/proj2/multimedia/alvar/index.html

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Postural Ergonomic Risk Assesment of Augmented Reality User Interface on Smarthpones in Cosmetic Industry AdvertisingSHS Web of Conferences10.1051/shsconf/202418901051189(01051)Online publication date: 9-Apr-2024
  • (2024)Workplace Aspects of Knowledge and Expertise Sharing Practices Supported by Augmented Reality Systems: Findings from a Design Case StudyComputer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)10.1007/s10606-024-09508-8Online publication date: 17-Dec-2024
  • (2024)Spatial Computing Through an HCI Lens - UX Evaluation Based on SituatednessHCI International 2024 Posters10.1007/978-3-031-61950-2_12(102-113)Online publication date: 7-Jun-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Human Factors and Ergonomics Evaluation of a Tablet Based Augmented Reality System in Maintenance Work

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      Mindtrek '18: Proceedings of the 22nd International Academic Mindtrek Conference
      October 2018
      282 pages
      ISBN:9781450365895
      DOI:10.1145/3275116
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      In-Cooperation

      • Tampere University of Technology
      • UTA: The University of Tampere
      • SIGCHI Finland: ACM SIGCHI Finland
      • Tampere University of Applied Sciences

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 10 October 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. Augmented reality
      2. Human factors/ergonomics
      3. Safety
      4. Tablets
      5. User experience

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Funding Sources

      • Business Finland

      Conference

      Mindtrek 2018
      Mindtrek 2018: Academic Mindtrek 2018
      October 10 - 11, 2018
      Tampere, Finland

      Acceptance Rates

      Mindtrek '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 34 of 68 submissions, 50%;
      Overall Acceptance Rate 110 of 207 submissions, 53%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)48
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
      Reflects downloads up to 23 Feb 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)Postural Ergonomic Risk Assesment of Augmented Reality User Interface on Smarthpones in Cosmetic Industry AdvertisingSHS Web of Conferences10.1051/shsconf/202418901051189(01051)Online publication date: 9-Apr-2024
      • (2024)Workplace Aspects of Knowledge and Expertise Sharing Practices Supported by Augmented Reality Systems: Findings from a Design Case StudyComputer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)10.1007/s10606-024-09508-8Online publication date: 17-Dec-2024
      • (2024)Spatial Computing Through an HCI Lens - UX Evaluation Based on SituatednessHCI International 2024 Posters10.1007/978-3-031-61950-2_12(102-113)Online publication date: 7-Jun-2024
      • (2023)A Neurophysiological Evaluation of Cognitive Load during Augmented Reality Interactions in Various Industrial Maintenance and Assembly TasksSensors10.3390/s2318769823:18(7698)Online publication date: 6-Sep-2023
      • (2023)Towards Industry 5.0: Augmented Reality Assistance Systems for People-Centred Digitalisation and Smart Manufacturing2023 28th International Conference on Automation and Computing (ICAC)10.1109/ICAC57885.2023.10275290(1-7)Online publication date: 30-Aug-2023
      • (2023)Alterations in Physical Demands During Virtual/Augmented Reality-Based Tasks: A Systematic ReviewAnnals of Biomedical Engineering10.1007/s10439-023-03292-051:9(1910-1932)Online publication date: 24-Jul-2023
      • (2023)Professional Differences in Use and Perceptions of an Augmented Reality Code Cart ApplicationConvergence: Breaking Down Barriers Between Disciplines10.1007/978-3-031-32198-6_29(333-340)Online publication date: 5-Nov-2023
      • (2022)Augmented Reality to overcome Visual Management implementation barriers in construction: a MEP case studyConstruction Management and Economics10.1080/01446193.2022.213574841:3(232-255)Online publication date: 4-Nov-2022
      • (2022)Systematic Literature Review on Augmented Reality-Based Maintenance Applications in Manufacturing Centered on Operator NeedsInternational Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology10.1007/s40684-022-00444-w10:2(567-585)Online publication date: 7-Jun-2022
      • (2021)A Reference Framework to Combine Model-Based Design and AR to Improve Social SustainabilitySustainability10.3390/su1304203113:4(2031)Online publication date: 14-Feb-2021
      • Show More Cited By

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Figures

      Tables

      Media

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media