A comfort analysis of using smart glasses during "picking" and "putting" tasks

Abstract Logistics and operations managers are always evaluating ways to improve their order picking operations. While there are numerous picking studies, currently there is a void in research focused on improving productivity and efficiency for putting-type warehousing tasks such as receiving, storing, and shipping. Studies have shown that the logistics industry demonstrates significant improvement when using head mounted display solutions for order picking tasks. However, little research has been completed on the comfort of head mounted displays such as smart glasses and how to alter them to increase their product lifecycle. Altered Vuxiz® glasses are used in this work to study comfort, preference, and performance while executing common logistical order picking and shipment putting tasks. The impact of design type (weighted front, side, or back) was investigated using comfort rating scales. Device preference surveys, the participants adjustments made to the glasses and task performance were also captured. There was no significant difference in device preference regardless of task type. Despite the side weighted arrangement being the most comfortable, the participants still were uncomfortable. For companies considering investing in smart glasses, other alternatives should be considered to extend the lifecycle of head mounted display devices.

[1]  Nela Murauer,et al.  A full shift field study to evaluate user- and process-oriented aspects of smart glasses in automotive order picking processes , 2018, IxD&A.

[2]  Lesley Strawderman,et al.  Evaluating change in user error when using ruggedized handheld devices. , 2015, Applied ergonomics.

[3]  Lesley Strawderman,et al.  Feedback mode preference and performance improvement with a handheld scanning device , 2020 .

[4]  Elizabeth Copeland Exploring feedback mode redundancy in handheld scanning tasks , 2015 .

[5]  Nils Boysen,et al.  Warehousing in the e-commerce era: A survey , 2019, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[6]  Pierre Fite-Georgel,et al.  Is there a reality in Industrial Augmented Reality? , 2011, 2011 10th IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality.

[7]  Maury A. Nussbaum,et al.  Augmented Reality “Smart Glasses” in the Workplace: Industry Perspectives and Challenges for Worker Safety and Health , 2016 .

[8]  Daniel Beimborn,et al.  Acceptance of Warehouse Picking Systems: A Literature Review , 2017, SIGMIS-CPR.

[9]  Willibald A. Günthner,et al.  Pick-by-Vision comes on age: evaluation of an augmented reality supported picking system in a real storage environment , 2009, AFRIGRAPH '09.

[10]  Reuben F. Burch,et al.  State-of-the-art review of athletic wearable technology: What 113 strength and conditioning coaches and athletic trainers from the USA said about technology in sports , 2020, International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching.

[11]  Jumyung Um,et al.  Augmented Reality in Warehouse Operations: Opportunities and Barriers , 2017 .

[12]  David M. Hoffman,et al.  Vergence-accommodation conflicts hinder visual performance and cause visual fatigue. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[13]  Chris Baber,et al.  A Tool to Assess the Comfort of Wearable Computers , 2005, Hum. Factors.

[14]  Penelope M Sanderson,et al.  Monitoring with Head-Mounted Displays: Performance and Safety in a Full-Scale Simulator and Part-Task Trainer , 2009, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[15]  Stephanie Guerlain,et al.  Usability evaluation of two smart glass systems , 2015, 2015 Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium.

[16]  Willibald A. Günthner,et al.  Evaluation of an Augmented Reality Supported Picking System Under Practical Conditions , 2010, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[17]  Anna Syberfeldt,et al.  Augmented Reality Smart Glasses in the Smart Factory: Product Evaluation Guidelines and Review of Available Products , 2017, IEEE Access.

[18]  Christoph H. Glock,et al.  Incorporating human factors in order picking planning models: framework and research opportunities , 2015 .

[19]  K. Fujii,et al.  Visualization for the analysis of fluid motion , 2005, J. Vis..

[20]  Willibald A. Günthner,et al.  Pick-by-vision: there is something to pick at the end of the augmented tunnel , 2011, Virtual Reality.

[21]  Ulrich Hartmann,et al.  First Impressions and Acceptance of Order Pickers Towards Using Data Glasses at a Simulated Workstation , 2019, HCI.

[22]  Sunwook Kim,et al.  Influences of augmented reality head-worn display type and user interface design on performance and usability in simulated warehouse order picking. , 2019, Applied ergonomics.

[23]  Thad Starner,et al.  An empirical task analysis of warehouse order picking using head-mounted displays , 2010, CHI.

[24]  Penelope M. Sanderson,et al.  Does a Head-Mounted Display Worsen Inattentional Blindness? , 2006 .

[25]  Kees Jan Roodbergen,et al.  Design and control of warehouse order picking: A literature review , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[26]  Hoda Davarzani,et al.  Toward a relevant agenda for warehousing research: literature review and practitioners’ input , 2015, Logist. Res..

[27]  Thad Starner,et al.  Studying Order Picking in an Operating Automobile Manufacturing Plant , 2012, 2012 16th International Symposium on Wearable Computers.

[28]  Lesley Strawderman,et al.  Ruggedized handheld device input effectiveness by generation: A time and error study , 2016 .

[29]  Chris Baber,et al.  The comfort assessment of wearable computers , 2002, Proceedings. Sixth International Symposium on Wearable Computers,.

[30]  Egils Ginters,et al.  Augmented Reality in Logistics , 2013 .