Advertisement

Virtual Reality

, Volume 4, Issue 4, pp 250–259 | Cite as

Evaluating the effectiveness of augmented reality displays for a manual assembly task

  • K. M. Baird
  • W. Barfield
Article

Abstract

The focus of this research was to examine how effectively augmented reality displays, generated with a wearable computer, could be used for aiding an operator performing a manual assembly task. Fifteen subjects were asked to assemble a computer motherboard using four types of instructional media: paper manual, computer-aided, opaque augmented reality display, and see-through augmented reality display. The time of assembly and assembly errors were measured for each type of instructional media, and a questionnaire focusing on usability was administered to each subject at the end of each condition. The results of the experiment indicated that the augmented reality conditions were more effective instructional aids for the assembly task than either the paper instruction manual or the computer-aided instruction. The see-through augmented reality display resulted in the fastest assembly times, followed by the opaque augmented reality display, the computer-aided instruction, and the paper instructions respectively. In addition, subjects made fewer errors using the augmented reality conditions compared to the computer-aided and paper instructional media. However, while the two augmented reality conditions were a more effective instructional media when time for assembly was the response measure, there were still some important usability issues associated with the augmented reality technology that were not present in the non-augmented reality conditions.

Keywords

Augmented reality Manual assembly Wearable computer 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ellis S, Menges B. Judgments of the distance to nearby virtual objects: interaction of viewing conditions and accommodative demand. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 1997; 6: 452–460Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barfield W, Baird KM, Shewchuk J, Ioannou G. Applications of augmented reality and wearable computers to manufacturing. In: Barfield W, Caudell T (eds) Fundamentals of wearable computers and augmented reality. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, in pressGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Azuma RT. A survey of augmented reality. Presence: teleoperators and virtual environments 1997; 6: 355–385Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barfield W, Baird KM. Future diretions in virtual reality: augmented environments through wearable computers. In: Proceedings from the 1st Annual Virtual Reality Seminar and Workshop. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, March 1998;Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barfield W, Baird KM. Issues in the design and use of wearable computers. Virtual Reality: Research, Development, and Applications 1998; 3: 157–166Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barfield W, Rosenberg C, Lotens W. Augmented-reality displays. In: Barfield W, Furness T (eds) Virtual environments and advanced interface design. Oxford University Press, 1995; 542–579Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Janin AL, Mizell DW, Caudell TP. Calibration of head-mounted displays for augmented reality applications. In: Proceedings IEEE Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium, Seattle, WA, 18–22 Sept 1993; 246–255Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lion D, Rosenberg C, Barfield W. Overlaying three-dimensional computer graphics with stereoscopic live motion video: applications for virtual environments. SID Conference, 1993; 483–486Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Starner T, Mann S, Rhodes B, Levine J, Healey J, Kirsch D, Picard R, Pentland A. Augmented reality through wearable computing. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 1997; 6: 386–398Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Holloway RL. Registration error analysis for augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 1997; 6: 413–432Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mizell D. Boeing's wire bundle assembly project. In: Barfield W. Caudell T. (eds) Fundamentals of wearable computers and augmented reality. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (in press)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ockerman J, Pritchett A. Preliminary investigation of wearable computers for task guidance in aircraft inspection. In: Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Wearable Computers, Pittsburgh, PA, 1998; 33–40Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Najjar L, Thompson J, Ockerman J. A wearable computer for quality assurance inspectors in a food processing. In: Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Wearable Computers, Boston, MA, 1997; 33–40Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Siewiorek D, Smailagic A, Bass L, Siegel J, Martin R, Bennington B. Adtranz: a mobile computing system for maintenance and collaboration. In: Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Wearable Computers, Pittsburgh, PA, 1998; 25–32Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Feiner S, Webster A, McIntyre B. Wearable computers at Columbia University, 1997. http://www.cs.columbia.edu/graphics/Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial and Systems EngineeringVirginia Polytechnic InstituteBlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations