Abstract
As we explore the use of consumer virtual reality technology for training applications, there is a need to evaluate its validity compared to more traditional training formats. In this paper, we present a study that compares the effectiveness of virtual training and physical training for teaching a bimanual assembly task. In a between-subjects experiment, 60 participants were trained to solve three 3D burr puzzles in one of six conditions comprised of virtual and physical training elements. In the four physical conditions, training was delivered via paper- and video-based instructions, with or without the physical puzzles to practice with. In the two virtual conditions, participants learnt to assemble the puzzles in an interactive virtual environment, with or without 3D animations showing the assembly process. After training, we conducted immediate tests in which participants were asked to solve a physical version of the puzzles. We measured performance through success rates and assembly completion testing times. We also measured training times as well as subjective ratings on several aspects of the experience. Our results show that the performance of virtually trained participants was promising. A statistically significant difference was not found between virtual training with animated instructions and the best performing physical condition (in which physical blocks were available during training) for the last and most complex puzzle in terms of success rates and testing times. Performance in retention tests two weeks after training was generally not as good as expected for all experimental conditions. We discuss the implications of the results and highlight the validity of virtual reality systems in training.
Highlights
The availability of consumer virtual reality technology has raised the manufacturing industry’s interest in virtual training for manual assembly tasks
In terms of training times, post hoc analysis revealed a significant difference between the physical conditions where no blocks were available during training (P and PVI) and the rest of physical conditions where blocks were available during training (PB and PVIB), amongst other significant interactions
In this paper we have presented a study that compares the effectiveness of virtual training and physical training for learning transfer of a bimanual assembly task
Summary
The availability of consumer virtual reality technology has raised the manufacturing industry’s interest in virtual training for manual assembly tasks. Virtual training would allow for the completion of operator instruction prior to the installation of physical workstations, tools and components. This would accelerate the end-to-end manufacturing process and, increase efficiency of production. We present a study that compares the effectiveness of virtual and traditional paper- and video-based training transfer of a bimanual assembly task, motivated by previous research [3, 10]. The conditions were designed to account for situations in which the physical puzzle blocks are available or not during training.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.