The potential for augmented reality in mechanical engineering is high. Nevertheless, many companies decide against using it. The Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences has investigated why this is the case.
The Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences has investigated what often hampers the use of remote AR.
Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden | Monopoly919 / stock.adobe.com
Augmented reality (AR) opens up new service opportunities for mechanical engineering companies. For example, machine operators or service technicians can send live error images via video stream to an expert in the company, who in turn enriches the live image with virtually superimposed instructions and thus guides the repair.
Around half (46%) of companies that have implemented such remote AR applications in recent years are satisfied with the results, as researchers from Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences, with the support of the VDMA, found out in a survey of 130 companies from the mechanical and plant engineering sector. The downside, however, is that 32% of respondents are dissatisfied with the implementation. The researchers took a closer look at the reasons for this as part of their study.
Often Difficult Applications Selected
One reason for dissatisfaction may be the chosen area of application: The majority of non-adopters (62%) use AR in field service, i.e. to support service employees in the field. However, experienced service technicians are often deployed here, who hardly benefit from live fault image transmission and AR annotations in the live image. The main functions of remote AR are less effective here than in direct collaboration with customers, where there are often misunderstandings that can be overcome with AR.
Non-adopters also report a lack of support from their management. However, for AR implementation to be successful, business models and service contracts must be adapted and change management must be introduced, which requires appropriate support from management.
Implementation Effort Underestimated
According to the researchers, many companies also underestimate the implementation effort. They consider the technical maturity of AR functions and the interoperability with systems such as ERP or CAD to be comparatively low and do not involve stakeholders such as users, colleagues in research and development or IT employees enough.
The researchers also conclude that non-adopters see comparatively little potential for increased sales and service margins as well as a higher willingness to pay on the part of customers. Non-adopters also rate the acceptance of AR solutions in their own company lower than adopters, i.e. companies that have successfully implemented remote AR.
Recommendations for a Successful AR Introduction
The researchers make a number of recommendations for the successful implementation of remote AR in the service:
- A use case with measurable added value should be found. "Nice-to-have" applications do not lead to success.
- The aim was to assess how KPIs could potentially be improved through the use of AR.
- You should be aware that field service support is more difficult to implement successfully than customer support in some respects.
- It requires a willingness to adapt service processes and contracts as well as business models and to initiate change management.
The importance of thoroughness during implementation is demonstrated by the researchers' assessment, often expressed in the survey, that companies do not dare to try again after a one-off failed implementation. The topic of remote AR is then "burnt out for years".
This is a partly automated translation of this german article.