On the Usability of Augmented Reality Devices for Interactive Risk Assessment

On the Usability of Augmented Reality Devices for Interactive Risk Assessment

A . Lanzotti F. Carbone Giuseppe Di Gironimo S. Papa F. Renno A. Tarallo Raffaele D’angelo

Fraunhofer JL IDEAS, Department of Industrial Engineering, University Federico II of Naples, Italy

Inail, Contarp, Area Regionale della Campania, Italy

1 January 2018
| Citation



The use of Augmented Reality (AR) technologies is the new challenge of management models born under the “Industry 4.0” paradigm. The aim of the work is to evaluate the usability of two types of AR devices (tablet and see-through) employed in the training and information activities of workers according to the ISO/IEC 9126 and ISO 9241 standards. Starting from the state of the art, evaluating market and competitors and developing different concepts of interfaces, a dedicated application was programmed and, then, the usability of such devices for the professional figures involved was evaluated through experimental tests. Two reference scenarios were defined, the Department of Industrial Engineering of University of Naples Federico II and INAIL (National Institute for Insurance against Accidents at Work) laboratories, an user interface was designed and developed, as an aid in the drafting of the document for risk evaluation and subsequent training of workers. The activity is part of the IDEE Project (Interactive Design for Ergonomics), born by the collaboration between Joint Lab IDEAS and Contarp-INAIL-Regional Management for Campania. The data analysis allowed to evaluate the goodness of the devices and the degree of satisfaction in their use on the basis of the sample of users who conducted the tests. The use of AR devices produces better results than paperwork in terms of efficiency and effectiveness, but not all devices produce appreciable results in terms of user satisfaction. Although AR technologies are mature, the tasks need to be carefully defined to avoid rejection phenomena. The strong expectation, that they generate in potential users, risks to remain disappointed today for some usability limits found in currently available devices. It is necessary to start testing in pilot applications in various industrial fields in order to capture in time and adequately support this opportunity of innovation in Italy.


augmented reality, risk assessment, usability

1. Introduction
2. Usability
3. Test in the Contarp Campania Laboratories
4. Results
5. Conclusions

[1] Di Gironimo, G., Matrone, G., Tarallo, A., Trotta, M. & Lanzotti, A., A virtual reality approach for usability assessment: case study on a wheelchair-mounted robot manipulator. Engineering with Computers, 29(3), pp. 359–373, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-012-0274-x

[2] Preece, J., Rogers, Y. & Sharp, H., Interaction Design, beyond human-computer interaction. John Wiley & Sons, 2002. (Traduzione italiana: “Interaction Design”, Apogeo).

[3] Polillo R., FACILE DA USARE Una moderna introduzione alla ingegneria dell’usabilità, Edizioni Apogeo, 2010.

[4] Figueira, J.,Greco, S. & Ehrgott, M., Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. Springer, Heidelberg, 2005.

[5] Patalano, S., Lanzotti, A., Del Giudice, D. M., Vitolo, F. & Gerbino, S., On the usability assessment of the graphical user interface related to a digital pattern software tool. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 11(3), pp. 457–467, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-015-0287-y

[6] Kim, J. & Han, S., A methodology for developing a usability index of consumer electronic products. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 38(3–4), pp. 333–345, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2007.12.002

[7] Laugwitz, B., Held, T. & Schrepp, M., “Construction and Evaluation of a User Experience Questionnaire”. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Holzinger, Andreas, 2008.

[8] Bertram, D., “Likertscales.” Retrieved November 2 (2007): 2013.

[9] Brooke, J., SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability Evaluation in Industry, 189.194, pp. 4–7, 1996.