Application of design principles for assembly instructions – evaluation of practitioner use

Production complexity causes assembly errors due to that the demands on the operators are high and there is a need to improve assembly instructions. Design principles for Information Presentation (DFIP) is a method developed to support such improvement and its application was evaluated in three case studies, 152 practitioners. Results indicate that DFIP use help simplifying the information presentation so that complexity can be reduced, and that step 4 is easiest to understand. In addition, the implementation of assembly instructions gave positive results.

[1]  George Chryssolouris,et al.  An efficient approach to human motion modeling for the verification of human-centric product design and manufacturing in virtual environments , 2007 .

[2]  F. GANIER.  Factors affecting the processing of procedural instructions: implications for document design , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication.

[3]  Johan Stahre,et al.  Cognitive automation strategy for reconfigurable and sustainable assembly systems , 2013 .

[4]  Tor Guimaraes,et al.  Empirically testing the impact of manufacturing system complexity on performance , 1999 .

[5]  Anurag Agarwal,et al.  The Internet of Things—A survey of topics and trends , 2015, Inf. Syst. Frontiers.

[6]  Leo Alting,et al.  Human Factors in the Management of Production , 2006 .

[7]  John Paul Macduffie,et al.  Product variety and manufacturing performance: evidence from the international automotive assembly plant study , 1996 .

[8]  Janis Terpenny,et al.  Harnessing Product Complexity: Step 1—Establishing Product Complexity Dimensions and Indicators , 2011 .

[9]  Janet Efstathiou,et al.  Advances on measuring the operational complexity of supplier-customer systems , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[10]  Gudela Grote.  Uncertainty Management at the Core of System Design , 2003 .

[11]  Neville A. Stanton,et al.  Sub-systems on the road to vehicle automation: Hands and feet free but not 'mind' free driving , 2014 .

[12]  Pat Hanrahan,et al.  Designing effective step-by-step assembly instructions , 2003, ACM Trans. Graph..

[13]  Cynthia F. Kurtz,et al.  The new dynamics of strategy: sense-making in a complex and complicated world , 2003, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[14]  Diann Reischman,et al.  The Magical Number 7 , 2011 .

[15]  E. Hollnagel.  Cognitive ergonomics: it's all in the mind , 1997 .

[16]  H.-P. Wiendahl,et al.  Management and Control of Complexity in Manufacturing , 1994 .

[17]  Yoram Koren,et al.  Product variety and manufacturing complexity in assembly systems and supply chains , 2008 .

[18]  Boris Brinzer,et al.  Complexity Thinking and Cyber-Physical Systems , 2017 .

[19]  Mathias Schmitt,et al.  Towards Industry 4.0 - Standardization as the crucial challenge for highly modular, multi-vendor production systems , 2015 .

[20]  Craig A. Smith,et al.  Appraisal as a pervasive determinant of anger. , 2004, Emotion.

[21]  Giovanni Miragliotta,et al.  Complexity management and supply chain performance assessment. A field study and a conceptual framework , 2004 .

[22]  Keith Case,et al.  Using mobile information sources to increase productivity and quality , 2010 .

[23]  Ann-Christine Falck,et al.  Proactive assessment of basic complexity in manual assembly: development of a tool to predict and control operator-induced quality errors , 2017, Int. J. Prod. Res..

[24]  Alexandre Dolgui,et al.  Ergonomics in assembly line balancing based on energy expenditure: a multi-objective model , 2016 .

[25]  S. Parker,et al.  A new model of work role performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts , 2007 .