Error Communication in Manual Assembly through a Projection-Based Assistance System

Abstract: While automation is advancing, manual labor continues to be relevant due to its flexibility, adaptability, cost considerations, and the unique qualities that humans bring to the workforce. In certain tasks and contexts, human involvement remains essential. One context is manual assembly which is still an essential part of many production systems due to the diversity of product variants and the challenges of producing in batch size 1. Manual assembly often outweigh the high costs of automated solutions. Nevertheless, a high variability of products and high quality standards pose a challenge to employees. Given the shortage of skilled workers, it is crucial to provide support for employees and ensure the quality of manual assembly. This includes assisting unskilled workers in the assembly process. In addition to optimizing training time and available instructions, error detection during the assembly process can serve as a mean to reduce errors and support employees. Error detection can be separated in two aspects: on the one hand the technological solution to recognize process steps and deviations and on the other hand the error communication when errors occur. This study lays the groundwork for the latter by investigating the effect of error communication during the process on assembly quality and employee satisfaction.An on-site manual assembly station was set up and n=12 participants have taken part in the study. Their task was to complete an assembly task based on instructions projected onto the work surface. In the control condition, participants independently navigated through the description of instructed assembly steps using displayed arrows. The experimental condition used a Wizard-of-Oz experimental design in which participants were informed that the assistance system automatically recognizes their process and detects errors. In the case of an error, a correction prompt emerged instead of the next instruction step. Performance measures included the required assembly time and recorded errors. Participants also completed questionnaires on workload (NASA TLX), usability (SUS), control beliefs in dealing with technology, and subjective performance.Data analysis is pending. Comparable measures will show in which regard the two conditions differ, shedding light on the effect of error communication during the assembly on quality and employee satisfaction. In the end, the implications for future research and application will be discussed in the paper.

Keywords: Error Communication, Assistance System, Manual Assembly

DOI: 10.54941/ahfe1005365

Cite this paper:

​