As companies continue to optimize their processes, many are adopting digital technologies. In sectors like automotive manufacturing and equipment maintenance, technicians must handle large volumes of task-related information. To support them, assistive systems based on augmented or mixed reality have been developed to deliver the right information at the right time. This study proposes a prototype approach to identify the most suitable technology for providing visual and cognitive support in specific work situations. Grounded in design research methodology, the approach draws on criteria identified through systematic literature reviews. It incorporates multicriterion analysis, the taxonomy of assistance systems, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), and a use-value study to compare several head-mounted display alternatives. Empirical validation was conducted through a case study in an industrial gas turbine assembly. The method stands out by integrating industrial constraints, such as narrow spaces and operator mobility, into the decision-making process. Both technical (processor, autonomy, connectivity) and ergonomic (field of view, weight, interactions) criteria were considered. In the case studied, Magic Leap 2 emerged as the most appropriate device. The findings underscore the value of a structured approach for selecting assistive technologies in complex environments and highlight the importance of combining expert evaluation with context-specific constraints. However, the study also emphasizes the need for further testing with end users to fully assess the usability and acceptance of the chosen solution.
References
[1]
Stecken, J., Linsinger, M., Sudhoff, M. and Kuhlenkötter, B. (2019) Didactic Concept for Increasing Acceptance of Consistent Data Standards Using the Example of Assistance Systems in Assembly. Procedia Manufacturing, 31, 277-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2019.03.044
[2]
Petzoldt, C., Keiser, D., Beinke, T. and Freitag, M. (2020) Requirements for an Incentive-Based Assistance System for Manual Assembly. In: Freitag, M., Haasis, H.D., Kotzab, H. and Pannek, J. Eds., Lecture Notes in Logistics, Springer International Publishing, 541-553. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44783-0_50
[3]
Nahavandi, S. (2019) Industry 5.0—A Human-Centric Solution. Sustainability, 11, Article 4371. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11164371
[4]
Romero, D., Bernus, P., Noran, O., Stahre, J. and Fast-Berglund, Å. (2016) The Operator 4.0: Human Cyber-Physical Systems & Adaptive Automation Towards Human-Automation Symbiosis Work Systems. In: Nääs, I., et al. Eds., IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, Springer International Publishing, 677-686. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51133-7_80
[5]
Kazakou, G. and Koutromanos, G. (2023) An Overview of Ten Years of Augmented Reality Smart Glasses in Education. Creative Education, 14, 2777-2792. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2023.1413175
[6]
Mark, B.G., Rauch, E. and Matt, D.T. (2022) Systematic Selection Methodology for Worker Assistance Systems in Manufacturing. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 166, Article 107982. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2022.107982
[7]
Fellmann, M., Robert, S., Büttner, S., Mucha, H. and Röcker, C. (2017) Towards a Framework for Assistance Systems to Support Work Processes in Smart Factories. In: Holzinger, A., Kieseberg, P., Tjoa, A. and Weippl, E., Eds., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer International Publishing, 59-68. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66808-6_5
[8]
Merazzi, J. and Friedel, A. (2017) Einteilung und Bewertung von Montageassistenzsys-Temen. ZWF Zeitschrift für wirtschaftlichen Fabrikbetrieb, 112, 413-416. https://doi.org/10.3139/104.111740
[9]
Hold, P., Erol, S., Reisinger, G. and Sihn, W. (2017) Planning and Evaluation of Digital Assistance Systems. Procedia Manufacturing, 9, 143-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.04.024
[10]
Hold, P. and Sihn, W. (2016) Towards a Model to Identify the Need and the Economic Efficiency of Digital Assistance Systems in Cyber-Physical Assembly Systems. 2016 1st International Workshop on Cyber-Physical Production Systems (CPPS), Vienna, 12-12 April 2016, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1109/cpps.2016.7483914
[11]
Syberfeldt, A., Danielsson, O. and Gustavsson, P. (2017) Augmented Reality Smart Glasses in the Smart Factory: Product Evaluation Guidelines and Review of Available Products. IEEE Access, 5, 9118-9130. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2017.2703952
[12]
Blessing, L.T.M. and Chakrabarti, A. (2009) DRM, a Design Research Methodology. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-587-1
[13]
Gagnon, Y. (2011) L’étude de cas comme méthode de recherche, 2e édition. Presses de l’Université du Québec. https://doi.org/10.1353/book16404
[14]
Liu, Y., Eckert, C.M. and Earl, C. (2020) A Review of Fuzzy AHP Methods for Decision-Making with Subjective Judgements. Expert Systems with Applications, 161, Article 113738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113738
[15]
Fraga-Lamas, P., Fernandez-Carames, T.M., Blanco-Novoa, O. and Vilar-Montesinos, M.A. (2018) A Review on Industrial Augmented Reality Systems for the Industry 4.0 Shipyard. IEEE Access, 6, 13358-13375. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2018.2808326
[16]
Saaty, T.L. (2008) Relative Measurement and Its Generalization in Decision Making Why Pairwise Comparisons Are Central in Mathematics for the Measurement of Intangible Factors the Analytic Hierarchy/Network Process. Revista de la Real Academia de Ciencias Exactas, Fisicas y Naturales. Serie A. Matematicas, 102, 251-318. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03191825
[17]
Chihara, T. and Seo, A. (2018) Evaluation of Physical Workload Affected by Mass and Center of Mass of Head-Mounted Display. Applied Ergonomics, 68, 204-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2017.11.016
[18]
Nichols, S. (1999) Physical Ergonomics of Virtual Environment Use. Applied Ergonomics, 30, 79-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-6870(98)00045-3
[19]
Danielsson, O., Holm, M. and Syberfeldt, A. (2020) Augmented Reality Smart Glasses in Industrial Assembly: Current Status and Future Challenges. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 20, Article 100175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2020.100175
[20]
Barrett, J. (2004) Side Effects of Virtual Environments: A Review of the Literature. Department of Defence, Australian Government, Defence Science and Technology Organisation. Report DSTO-TR-1419, 58p.
[21]
Haase, T., Radde, J., Keller, A., Berndt, D. and Dick, M. (2020) Integrated Learning and Assistive Systems for Manual Work in Production-Proposal for a Systematic Approach to Technology Selection and Design. In: Ahram, T. and Falcão, C., Eds., Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Springer International Publishing, 853-859. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51828-8_113
[22]
Pokorni, B. and Constantinescu, C. (2021) Design and Configuration of Digital Assistance Systems in Manual Assembly of Variant-Rich Products Based on Customer Journey Mapping. Procedia CIRP, 104, 1777-1782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2021.11.299
[23]
(2019) ISO 9241-11, ISO 9241-11: 2019 (en) Ergonomie de l’interaction homme-système-Partie 11: Utilisabilité-définitions et concepts.
[24]
Aranda-García, S., Santos-Folgar, M., Fernández-Méndez, F., Barcala-Furelos, R., Pardo Ríos, M., Hernández Sánchez, E., et al. (2022) “dispatcher, Can You Help Me? a Woman Is Giving Birth”. A Pilot Study of Remote Video Assistance with Smart Glasses. Sensors, 23, Article 409. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23010409
[25]
Klinker, K., et al. (2018) Structure for Innovations: A Use Case Taxonomy for Smart Glasses in Service Processes. MKWI, 1599-1610. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Manuel-Wiesche-2/publication/321488897_Structure_for_innovations_A_use_case_taxonomy_for_smart_glasses_in_service_processes/links/5a32cf1aaca2727144647288/Structure-for-innovations-A-use-case-taxonomy-for-smart-glasses-in-service-processes.pdf
[26]
Basoglu, N., Ok, A.E. and Daim, T.U. (2017) What Will It Take to Adopt Smart Glasses: A Consumer Choice Based Review? Technology in Society, 50, 50-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2017.04.005
[27]
Wang, C., Hsiao, C., Tai, A. and Wang, M.J. (2023) Usability Evaluation of Augmented Reality Visualizations on an Optical See-Through Head-Mounted Display for Assisting Machine Operations. Applied Ergonomics, 113, Article 104112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2023.104112
[28]
Kim, Y.M., Bahn, S. and Yun, M.H. (2021) Wearing Comfort and Perceived Heaviness of Smart Glasses. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 31, 484-495. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20895
[29]
Brusie, T., Fijal, T., Keller, A., Lauff, C., Barker, K., Schwinck, J., et al. (2015) Usability Evaluation of Two Smart Glass Systems. 2015 Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium, Charlottesville, 24-24 April 2015, 336-341. https://doi.org/10.1109/sieds.2015.7117000
[30]
Chang, J., Jung, K., Kim, W., Moon, S.K., Freivalds, A., Simpson, T.W., et al. (2014) Effects of Weight Balance on a 3D TV Shutter Type Glasses: Subjective Discomfort and Physical Contact Load on the Nose. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 44, 801-809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2014.10.005
[31]
Pose-Díez-de-la-Lastra, A., Moreta-Martinez, R., García-Sevilla, M., García-Mato, D., Calvo-Haro, J.A., Mediavilla-Santos, L., et al. (2022) Hololens 1 Vs. Hololens 2: Improvements in the New Model for Orthopedic Oncological Interventions. Sensors, 22, Article 4915. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22134915
[32]
Hoffman, D.M., Stepien, N.N. and Xiong, W. (2016) The Importance of Native Panel Contrast and Local Dimming Density on Perceived Image Quality of High Dynamic Range Displays. Journal of the Society for Information Display, 24, 216-228. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsid.416
