First application of robot teaching in an existing industry 4.0 environment: Does it really work?

Societies

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2016, Pages

  Weiss, Astrid ^a   Huber, Andreas ^a   Minichberger, Jürgen ^b   Ikeda, Markus ^b  

^a VIENNA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Austria)

^b PROFACTOR GMBH   (Austria)

Author keywords

Case study; Field test; Human robot interaction; Industry 4.0; Robot teaching

Indexed keywords

EID: 85020130803     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20754698     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/soc6030020     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Young, M. The Technical Writer’s Handbook; University Science Books: Mill Valley, CA, USA, 1989.
2. Alben, L. Quality of experience: Defining the criteria for effective interaction design. Interactions 1996, 3, 11–15. [CrossRef]
3. Buchner, R.; Wurhofer, D.; Weiss, A.; Tscheligi, M. Robots in time: How user experience in human-robot interaction changes over time. In International Conference on Social Robotics; Herrmann, G., Pearson, M.J., Lenz, A., Bremner, P., Spiers, A., Leonards, U., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; Volume 8239, pp. 138–147.
4. Obrist, M.; Reitberger, W.; Wurhofer, D.; Förster, F.; Tscheligi, M. User experience research in the semiconductor factory: A contradiction? In Human-Computer Interaction—INTERACT 2011; Campos, P., Graham, N., Jorge, J., Nunes, N., Palanque, P., Winckler, M., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2011; Volume 6949, pp. 144–151.
5. Hermann, M.; Pentek, T.; Otto, B. Design Principles for Industrie 4.0 Scenarios. 2015. Available online: http://www.snom.mb.tu-dortmund.de/cms/de/forschung/Arbeitsberichte/Design-Principles-for-Industrie-4_0-Scenarios.pdf (accessed on 25 February 2016).
6. Jasperneite, J.; Niggemann, O. Systemkomplexität in der Automation beherrschen. Intelligente Aisstenzsysteme unterstützen den Menschen. Available online: http://www.ciit-owl.de/uploads/media/Jasperneite_Niggemann_edi_09_S.36-44.pdf (accessed on 19 July 2016).
7. Kagermann, H.; Wahlster, W.; Helbig, J. Recommendations for Implementing the Strategic Initiative Industrie 4.0. Final report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group. Available online: http://www.acatech.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Baumstruktur_nach_Website/Acatech/root/de/Material_fuer_Sonderseiten/Industrie_4.0/Final_report__Industrie_4.0_accessible.pdf,2013 (accessed on 13 July 2016).
8. Meneweger, T.; Wurhofer, D.; Fuchsberger, V.; Tscheligi, M. Erlebniszentrierte Interviews zur Erfassung von User Experience Mit Industrierobotern. In Design 2 Product. Beiträge zur empirischen Designforschung, Band 5; Bucher: Hohenems, Austria, 2016. (In German)
9. Zäh, M.F.; Wiesbeck, M.; Engstler, F.; Friesdorf, F.; Schubö, A.; Stork, S.; Bannat, A.; Wallhoff, F. Kognitive Assistenzsysteme in der manuellen Montage. Werkstattstech. Online 2007, 97, 644–650.
10. Rooker, M.; Hofmann, M.; Minichberger, J.; Ikeda, M.; Ebenhofer, G.; Fritz, G.; Pichler, A. Flexible and assistive quality checks with industrial robots. In Proceedings of the ISR/Robotik 2014, the 41st International Symposium on Robotics, Munich, Germany, 2–3 June 2014; pp. 1–6.
11. LIAA Project. Available online: http://www.project-leanautomation.eu/(accessed on 25 February 2016).
12. Plasch, M.; Pichler, A.; Bauer, H.; Rooker, M.; Ebenhofer, G. A plug & produce approach to design robot assistants in a sustainable manufacturing environment. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing (FAIM 2012), Helsinki, Finland, 10–13 June 2012.
13. Hvilshøj, M.; Bøgh, S. “Little Helper”—An autonomous industrial mobile manipulator concept. Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 2011, 8, 80–90. [CrossRef]
14. Helms, E.; Schraft, R.D.; Hagele, M. rob@work: Robot assistant in industrial environments. In Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Berlin, Germany, 25–27 September 2002; pp. 399–404.
15. Wögerer, C.; Bauer, H.; Rooker, M.; Ebenhofer, G.; Rovetta, A.; Robertson, N.; Pichler, A. LOCOBOT-low cost toolkit for building robot co-workers in assembly lines. In Intelligent Robotics and Applications; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; pp. 449–459.
16. Hägele, M.; Neugebauer, J.; Schraft, R.D. From robots to robot assistants. In Proceedings of the 32nd ISR (International Symposium on Robotics), Seoul, Korea, 19–21 April 2001.
17. Feldmann, K.; Schöppner, V. Handbuch Fügen, Handhaben und Montieren; Carl Hanser Verlag: München, Germany, 2013; p. 231.
18. Peshkin, M.A.; Colgate, J.E.; Wannasuphoprasit, W.; Moore, C.A.; Gillespie, R.B.; Akella, P. Cobot architecture. IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 2001, 17, 377–390. [CrossRef]
19. Gambao, E.; Hernando, M.; Surdilovic, D. A new generation of collaborative robots for material handling. Gerontechnology 2012, 11, 368. [CrossRef]
20. MRK-Systeme. Available online: http://www.mrk-systeme.de/index.html (accessed on 25 February 2016).
21. KUKA Laboratories. Available online: http://www.kuka-healthcare.com/de/lightweight_robotics/(accessed on 25 February 2016).
22. Bøgh, S.; Hvilshøj, M.; Kristiansen, M.; Madsen, O. Autonomous industrial mobile manipulation (AIMM): From research to industry. In Proceedings of the 42nd International Symposium on Robotics, Chicago, IL, USA, 21–24 March 2011.
23. Griffiths, S.; Voss, L.; Röhrbein, F. Industry-academia collaborations in robotics: Comparing Asia, Europe and North-America. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Hongkong, China, 31 May–7 June 2014.
24. Pan, Z.; Polden, J.; Larkin, N.; van Duin, S.; Norrish, J. Recent progress on programming methods for industrial robots. Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 2012, 28, 87–94. [CrossRef]
25. Biggs, G.; Macdonald, B. A survey of robot programming systems. In Proceedings of the Australasian Conference on Robotics and Automation, Brisbane, Australia, 1–3 December 2003; pp. 1–3.
26. Ko, W.K.H.; Wu, Y.; Tee, K.P.; Buchli, J. Towards industrial robot learning from demonstration. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction (HAI’15), New York, NY, USA, 21–24 October 2015; pp. 235–238.
27. Pires, J.N.; Veiga, G.; Araújo, R. Programming-by-demonstration in the coworker scenario for SMEs. Ind. Robot Int. J. 2009, 36, 73–83. [CrossRef]
28. Argall, B.D.; Billard, A.G. A survey of tactile human–robot interactions. Robot. Auton. Syst. 2010, 58, 1159–1176. [CrossRef]
29. De Santis, A.; Siciliano, B.; De Luca, A.; Bicchi, A. An atlas of physical human–robot interaction. Mech. Mach. Theory 2008, 43, 253–270. [CrossRef]
30. ISO 10218-1:2011 (Robots). Available online: http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=51330 (accessed on 25 February 2016).
31. ISO 10218-1:2011 (Robot Systems and Integration). Available online: http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=41571 (accessed on 25 February 2016).
32. Ikemoto, S.; Amor, H.B.; Minato, T.; Jung, B.; Ishiguro, H. Physical human-robot interaction: Mutual learning and adaptation. IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag. 2012, 19, 24–35. [CrossRef]
33. Meyer, C. Aufnahme und Nachbearbeitung von Bahnen bei der Programmierung Durch Vormachen von Industrierobotern. Ph.D. Thesis, Universität Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany, 2011. (In German)
34. Geomagic Touch. Available online: http://geomagic.com/en/products/phantom-omni/overview (accessed on 25 February 2016).
35. Fritzsche, M.; Elkmann, N.; Schulenburg, E. Tactile sensing: A key technology for safe physical human robot interaction. In Proceedings of the 2011 6th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), Lausanne, Switzerland, 8–11 March 2011; pp. 139–140.
36. Intuitive an Mobile Robot Teach-In. Available online: http://www.keba.com/en/industrial-automation/ketop-operation-monitoring/mobile-operating-panels/ketop-t10-directmove/(accessed on 25 February 2016).
37. Baxter. Available online: http://www.rethinkrobotics.com/products/baxter (accessed on 25 February 2016).
38. Stadler, S.; Weiss, A.; Mirnig, N.; Tscheligi, M. Antropomorphism in the factory: A paradigm change? In Proceedings of the 8th ACM/IEEE International conference on Human-Robot interaction, Tokyo, Janpan, 3–6 March 2013; pp. 231–232.
39. Weiss, A.; Buchner, R.; Fischer, H.; Tscheligi, M. Exploring human-robot cooperation possibilities for semiconductor manufacturing. In Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Systems, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 23–27 May 2011.
40. Buchner, R.; Mirnig, N.; Weiss, A.; Tscheligi, M. Evaluating in real life robotic environment—Bringing together research and practice. In Proceedings of the RO-MAN 2012, 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Paris, France, 9–13 September 2012.
41. Bartneck, C.; Kulić, D.; Croft, E.; Zoghbi, S. Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 2009, 1, 71–81. [CrossRef]
42. Weiss, A.; Igelsböck, J.; Wurhofer, D.; Tscheligi, M. Looking forward to a Robotic Society“?—Imaginations of future human-robot relationships. Special issue on the human robot personal relationship conference. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 2011, 3, 111–123. [CrossRef]
43. Lohse, M.; Hanheide, M.; Rohlfing, K.; Sagerer, G. Systematic interaction analysis (SINA) in HRI. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE International conference on Human Robot Interaction, La Jolla, CA, USA, 11–19 March 2009; pp. 93–100.
44. Strasser, E.; Weiss, A.; Tscheligi, M. Affect misattribution procedure: An implicit technique to measure user experience in HRI. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot interaction, New York, NY, USA, 5–8 March 2012.
45. Stadler, S.; Weiss, A.; Tscheligi, M. I Trained this Robot: The Impact of Pre-Experience and Execution Behavior on Robot Teachers. In Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Edinburgh, UK, 25–29 August 2014.
46. Seo, S.H.; Gu, J.; Jeong, S.; Griffin, K.; Young, J.E.; Bunt, A.; Prentice, S. Women and men collaborating with robots on assembly lines: Designing a novel evaluation scenario for collocated human-robot teamwork. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction (HAI’15), New York, NY, USA, 21–24 October 2015; pp. 3–9.
47. Bernhaupt, R.; Weiss, A. How to convince stakeholders to take up usability evaluation results? In COST294-MAUSE Workshop Downstream Utility: The Good, the Bad and the Utterly Useless Usability Feedback; Institute of Research in Informatics of Toulouse: Toulouse, France, 2007; pp. 37–39.
48. Weiss, A.; Bernhaupt, R.; Lankes, M.; Tscheligi, M. The USUS evaluation framework for Human-Robot Interaction. In Proceedings of the Symposium on New Frontiers in Human-Robot Interaction, Edinburgh, UK, 6–9 April 2009; pp. 158–165.
49. Universal Robots. Available online: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Robots (accessed on 13 July 2016).
50. Bovenzi, M. Health effects of mechanical vibration. G. Ital. Med. Lav. Ergon. 2005, 27, 58–64. [PubMed]
51. Brooke, J. SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability Eval. Ind. 1996, 189, 4–7.
52. Nomura, T.; Suzuki, T.; Kanda, T. Measurement of negative attitudes toward robots. Interact. Stud. 2006, 7, 437–454. [CrossRef]
53. Hart, S.G.; Staveland, L.E. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. Adv. Psychol. 1988, 52, 139–183.
54. Pupil Labs. Available online: https://pupil-labs.com/(accessed on 13 July 2016).
55. Flick, U. Episodic interviewing. In Qualitative Researching with Text, Image and Sound; Bauer, M.W., Gaskell, G., Eds.; Sage: London, UK, 2000; pp. 75–92.
56. Lewis, J.R.; Sauro, J. The factor structure of the system usability scale. In Proceedings of the International Conference HCII 2009, San Diego, CA, USA, 19–24 July 2009.
57. Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006, 3, 77–101. [CrossRef]
58. Weiss, A. Validation of an Evaluation Framework for Human-Robot Interaction. The Impact of Usability, Social Acceptance, User Experience, and Societal Impact on Collaboration with Humanoid Robots. Ph.D. Thesis, University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria, 2010.
59. Weiss, A.; Huber, A. User experience of a smart factory robot: Assembly line workers demand adaptive robots. 2016. arXiv:1606.03846.
60. Fukui, H.; Yonejima, S.; Yamano, M.; Dohi, M.; Yamada, M.; Nishiki, T. Development of teaching pendant optimized for robot application. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE Workshop on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impacts, Tokyo, Japan, 23–25 November 2009; pp. 72–77.
61. Bonekamp, L.; Sure, M. Consequences of Industry 4.0 on human labour and work organisation. J. Bus. Media Psychol. 2015, 6, 33–40.
62. Ebenhofer, G.; Ikeda, M.; Huber, A.; Weiss, A. User-centered assistive robotics for production—The AssistMe Project. In Proceedings of the OAGM-ARW2016: Joint Workshop on “Computer Vision and Robotics, Wels, Austria, 11–13 May 2016.
63. Why You Only Need to Test with 5 Users. Available online: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/why-you-only-need-to-test-with-5-users/(accessed on 13 July 2016).