Logo
ScienceStack
Table of Contents
Fetching ...
Sign In

Assessing the User Experience of Extended Reality Devices for (Dis)Assembly: A Classroom Study

Brandon S. Byers, Eleftherios Triantafyllidis, Thibaut Menny, Martin Schulte, Catherine De Wolf

TL;DR

The paper addresses the lack of guidance for selecting XR devices for complex (dis)assembly in the AEC sector by conducting a classroom-based, cross-device user-experience study. It employs SUS and NASA TLX metrics to quantify usability and cognitive workload across AR (via mobile AR/Fologram), MR (HoloLens), and VR (Quest 2) during AdapTable disassembly/reassembly tasks. Results indicate AR yields higher usability while MR achieves lower cognitive load, with VR lagging in usability; however, small and unbalanced sample sizes limit definitive conclusions. The study provides directional insights for academics and practitioners and outlines guidelines for more rigorous XR device comparisons, highlighting opportunities to advance XR for circular construction. The work also discusses adoption barriers and suggests future research directions, including field tests, improved data pipelines, and enhanced interaction modalities.

Abstract

Despite the current rise and promising capabilities of Extended Reality (XR) technologies, the architecture, engineering, and construction industry lacks informed guidance when choosing between these technologies, especially for complex processes like assembly and disassembly tasks. This research compares the user experience across different XR devices for (dis)assembly utilizing the NASA Task Load Index and System Usability Scale metrics. Through a workshop and surveys with graduate civil engineering and architecture students, the study found that Augmented Reality scored highest in usability, followed closely by Mixed Reality. However, Mixed Reality showed the best task load index score, indicating low cognitive demand. The findings presented in this research may aid academics and practitioners in making informed decisions when selecting XR systems in practical, real-world assembly scenarios. Moreover, this study suggests opportunities and guidelines for more detailed XR system comparisons and exploration of XR's further role in circular construction practices.

Assessing the User Experience of Extended Reality Devices for (Dis)Assembly: A Classroom Study

TL;DR

The paper addresses the lack of guidance for selecting XR devices for complex (dis)assembly in the AEC sector by conducting a classroom-based, cross-device user-experience study. It employs SUS and NASA TLX metrics to quantify usability and cognitive workload across AR (via mobile AR/Fologram), MR (HoloLens), and VR (Quest 2) during AdapTable disassembly/reassembly tasks. Results indicate AR yields higher usability while MR achieves lower cognitive load, with VR lagging in usability; however, small and unbalanced sample sizes limit definitive conclusions. The study provides directional insights for academics and practitioners and outlines guidelines for more rigorous XR device comparisons, highlighting opportunities to advance XR for circular construction. The work also discusses adoption barriers and suggests future research directions, including field tests, improved data pipelines, and enhanced interaction modalities.

Abstract

Despite the current rise and promising capabilities of Extended Reality (XR) technologies, the architecture, engineering, and construction industry lacks informed guidance when choosing between these technologies, especially for complex processes like assembly and disassembly tasks. This research compares the user experience across different XR devices for (dis)assembly utilizing the NASA Task Load Index and System Usability Scale metrics. Through a workshop and surveys with graduate civil engineering and architecture students, the study found that Augmented Reality scored highest in usability, followed closely by Mixed Reality. However, Mixed Reality showed the best task load index score, indicating low cognitive demand. The findings presented in this research may aid academics and practitioners in making informed decisions when selecting XR systems in practical, real-world assembly scenarios. Moreover, this study suggests opportunities and guidelines for more detailed XR system comparisons and exploration of XR's further role in circular construction practices.
Paper Structure (14 sections, 1 equation, 6 figures)

This paper contains 14 sections, 1 equation, 6 figures.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. Background of XR in Practice
  3. Research on XR in AEC
  4. Potential of XR for Circular Construction
  5. Methods
  6. The Experiment
  7. The Analysis
  8. Results
  9. Result I: SUS Analysis
  10. Result II: NASA TLX Analysis
  11. Discussion
  12. Limitations
  13. Call for Future Work
  14. Conclusions

Figures (6)

  • Figure 1: Overview of using Extended Reality (XR) for the disassembly of tables made out of reused materials in a classroom study at ETH Zurich.(A) User wearing the HoloLens with workshop facilitators. (B) Class overview of students using XR assisted technologies for step-by-step guided assembly. (C) Close-up of the real table with its digital model overlayed.
  • Figure 2: AdapTable exploded view.
  • Figure 3: SUS Average Scores of the Devices with Confidence Interval (Initial image from sauro_5_2018 and adapted by authors).
  • Figure 4: Violin plot distribution of the participants familiarity with each XR system and video games (for reference).
  • Figure 5: Violin plot of SUS distribution results per XR device.
  • ...and 1 more figures