skip to main content
10.1145/3316782.3322750acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespetraConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Evaluating learning approaches for product assembly: using chunking of instructions, spatial augmented reality and display based work instructions

Authors Info & Claims
Published:05 June 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Augmented Reality (AR) as an assistive technology is a promising tool for novice operators to learn assembly processes. This experiment compared an AR instruction method to display based electronic working instructions (EWI) for product assembly, to assess learning during the first repetitions of the products. In addition, two types of work instructions were used, i.e., standard and chunk instructions. In this experiment a chunk instruction consists of six assembly steps. Effects of the instruction method and type on the learning phase were evaluated with 24 novice operators building two products i.e.. Operators were then asked to build the same products without instructions in order to assess learned skills and establish effects on the recall phase, also as a result of instruction method and type. Task completion time (TCT), product quality, operator workload and learning curve were measured. The learning curve, as indicated by the TCT, took place during the first three repetitions of product assembly. Instruction method and instruction type had no effect on the learning curve. Product quality was high and no differences were found between learning conditions. Operator workload revealed that chunking of the instruction increased workload during the learning phase. During the recall phase, the AR group's TCT increased 19.2%, but only for the first product's repetition without instruction. Product quality remained the same during the recall phase, however operator workload was reduced for chunk learned products. This study indicates that chunking of instructions should be avoided for novice workers. Both EWI and AR can be used for teaching new assembly procedures. While AR and EWI are useful during the learning phase, there are indications that these methods might hinder the operator once they required the necessary skills and knowledge to assemble the product. A possible solution is making instructions more adaptive to fit the skill proficiency of the operator.

References

  1. Aberdeen Group (2014). Bridging the Gap Between Product Development and Operations. http://www.aberdeen.com/research/9340/rr-manufacturingproduct-development-/content.aspx#sthash.K8rq0kXI.dpfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Engelke, T., Keil, J., Rojtberg, P., Wientapper, F., Schmitt, M., & Bockholt, U. (2015, March). Content first: a concept for industrial augmented reality maintenance applications using mobile devices. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference (pp. 105--111). ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Funk, M., Mayer, S., & Schmidt, A. (2015). Using in-situ projection to support cognitively impaired workers at the workplace. In Proceedings of the 17th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers & accessibility: 185--192 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Büttner, S., Funk, M., Sand, O. and Röcker, C. (2016). Using head-mounted displays and in-situ projection for assistive systems - a comparison. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM international conference on pervasive technologies related to assistive environments, New York, NY, USA, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Bosch, T., Konemann, R., de Cock, H., van Rhijn, G. (2017). The effects of projected versus display instructions on productivity, quality and workload in a simulated assembly task. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (PETRA'17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 412--415. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Wright, T.P. (1936). Factors affecting the cost of airplanes, J. Aeronaut. Sci., 3(4): 122--128Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Jaber, M.Y. (2011) Learning Curves Theory, Models, and Applications. Taylor & Francis Group, CRC Press, Boca Raton ISBN: 978-1-4398-0740-8Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Tulving, E., & Craik, F. I. M. (2000). The Oxford handbook of memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Miller, G.A. (1956), The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information. Psychological Review, 63, 81--97.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Werrlich, S., Eichstetter, E., Nitsche, K. & Notni, G. (2017) An Overview of Evaluations Using Augmented Reality for Assembly Training Tasks. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Computer and Information Engineering Vol:11, No:10Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Hart, S.G. & Staveland, L.E.. 1988. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. Advances in psychology 52 (1988), 139--183.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Lamberti, F., Manuri, F., Sanna, A., Paravati, G., Pezzolla,P., & Montuschi, P. (2014). Challenges, opportunities, and future trends of emerging techniques for augmented reality based maintenance. IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing, 2(4), 411-421.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Funk, M., Bächler, A., Bächler, L. & Kosch, T., Heidenreich, T. & Schmidt, A. (2017). Working with Augmented Reality?: A Long-Term Analysis of In-Situ Instructions at the Assembly Workplace. 222-229. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Vandenberg, S. & Kuse, A.R. (1978). Mental Rotations, a Group Test of Three-Dimensional Spatial Visualization. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 47 (2): 599--604. PMID 724398.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Evaluating learning approaches for product assembly: using chunking of instructions, spatial augmented reality and display based work instructions

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Other conferences
          PETRA '19: Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments
          June 2019
          655 pages
          ISBN:9781450362320
          DOI:10.1145/3316782

          Copyright © 2019 ACM

          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].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 5 June 2019

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader