Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Available ScienceDirect
online atonline
Available www.sciencedirect.com
at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 00 (2018) 000–000
ScienceDirect www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

ProcediaProcedia
CIRP 00CIRP
(2017)
72000–000
(2018) 1142–1147
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

51st CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems

Sensor-driven Analysis
28th CIRP Design of Manual
Conference, Assembly
May 2018, Systems
Nantes, France

A newKärcher*,
Susann methodology
Emir Cuk,toTimo
analyze the
Denner, functional
David and
Görzig, Lisa C. physical architecture
Günther, Anna of
Hansmersmann,
Günther Riexinger, Thomas Bauernhansl
existing products for an assembly oriented product family identification
Fraunhofer Institute for Manufacturing Engineering and Automation IPA, Nobelstrasse 12, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany

Paul Stief *, Jean-Yves Dantan, Alain Etienne, Ali Siadat

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +49-711970-3838. E-mail address: susann.kaercher@ipa.fraunhofer.de
École Nationale Supérieure d’Arts et Métiers, Arts et Métiers ParisTech, LCFC EA 4495, 4 Rue Augustin Fresnel, Metz 57078, France

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 3 87 37 54 30; E-mail address: paul.stief@ensam.eu

Abstract

A reliable knowledge of processing times and following analysis are the basis for successful production planning. In particular, manual
assembly processes are associated with great efforts to get data about processing times.
Abstract
That is why manual assembly processes are often not sufficiently transparent to enable good production planning, scheduling and control.
This paper describes a system for automatic analysis and evaluation of manual assembly processes. It is driven by sensor and measurement
Intechnology,
today’s business environment,
constructed modularly, theand
trend
cantowards
be usedmore product
in a wide variety
range and customization
of assembly processes. is unbroken. Due to this development, the need of
agile and reconfigurable production systems emerged to cope with various products and product families. To design and optimize production
systems as well as to choose the optimal product matches, product analysis methods are needed. Indeed, most of the known methods aim to
© 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
analyze a product or one product family on the physical level. Different product families, however, may differ largely in terms of the number and
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 51st CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems.
nature of components. This fact impedes an efficient comparison and choice of appropriate product family combinations for the production
system. A new
Keywords: methodology
assembly; is proposed
sensor; analysis; to modular;
manual; analyze evaluation
existing products in view of their functional and physical architecture. The aim is to cluster
these products in new assembly oriented product families for the optimization of existing assembly lines and the creation of future reconfigurable
assembly systems. Based on Datum Flow Chain, the physical structure of the products is analyzed. Functional subassemblies are identified, and
a functional analysis is performed. Moreover, a hybrid functional and physical architecture graph (HyFPAG) is the output which depicts the
similarity between product families by providing design support to both, production
1. Introduction In moresystem
than planners and product
sixty percent designers. Andata-driven
of companies illustrative
example of a nail-clipper is used to explain the proposed methodology. Andecisionsindustrial case
havestudy on or
a high twovery
product
highfamilies
priorityof[3].
steering
It is,columns of
therefore,
thyssenkrupp Presta France is then carried out to give a first industrial evaluation of the proposed approach.
Nowadays companies face the challenging environment of crucial to have reliable data. Assembly processes can only be
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
an increasing number of product variants. Furthermore, the reliably planned, if reliable data are available.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 28th CIRP Design Conference 2018.
trend towards decreasing lot sizes even down to one-piece In the field of assembly planning and optimization, the
production continues.
Keywords: Assembly; Design[1] In order
method; Familytoidentification
meet the challenges of need emerges to simplify the analysis of assembly processes
the changing environment and remain competitive, it is and the acquisition of data.
necessary to properly plan the production, especially the
assembly, in which seventy percent of production costs are 2. Objective
1.incurred
Introduction
[2]. However, there is often still too little of the product range and characteristics manufactured and/or
transparency within the system. Especially with manual assembled in this
This paper system.
aims In this
to present ancontext,
approach thetomain challenge
a flexible systemin
Due to processes,
assembly the fast itdevelopment
is difficult into the obtaindomain of
complete modelling
that enables andautomatic
analysis isanalysis
now notand onlyevaluation
to cope with single
of manual
communication
transparency due andto an ongoing
a lack trend of digitization
of standardization and
and detailed products,
assembly aprocesses.
limited product range or
The system existing
needs to beproduct families,
designed in its
digitalization, manufacturing
documented assembly enterprises
instructions. are facing
In general, important
the more time a but also to be
hardware, by able to analyze
sensors and to compare
and measurement productsastowell
technology, define
as
challenges in today’s
manual assembly processmarkettakes,environments:
the lower thea transparency
continuing new
in itsproduct families.
software. It can
The data be observed
create that classical
transparency existing
and are the basis
tendency
becomes.towards
But evenreduction of product
with shorter development
assembly processingtimestimes,
and product families are
for a successful regrouped
production in function
planning, of clientsand
scheduling or features.
control.
shortened
there oftenproduct lifecycles.
is no complete In addition, there is an increasing
transparency. However,
The system assembly
ensuresoriented
reliableproduct families
processing are and
times hardly to find.
allows an
demand
Due toof the
customization, being at the
missing transparency, it issame
oftentime in apossible
neither global On theofproduct
analysis family
the process level, products differ mainly in two
steps.
competition
to provide with competitors
specified all over
assembly the world.
processes norThis trend,
assembly main In characteristics:
the following the(i) the number
state of theofartcomponents
and research andgaps
(ii) the
are
which is inducing
instructions the development
in a production with smallfrom lot macro
sizestoormicro
long type of components
presented. (e.g.the
Afterwards, mechanical,
system is electrical,
introducedelectronical).
especially in
markets,
assemblyresults
processinsteps.
diminished lot sizes due to augmenting its Classical
setting, methodologies
IT-architecture considering mainlyFurthermore,
and evaluation. single products the
product varieties (high-volume to low-volume production) [1]. or solitary,
benefits already existing product families analyze the
are shown.
To cope with this augmenting variety as well as to be able to product structure on a physical level (components level) which
identify possible optimization potentials in the existing causes difficulties regarding an efficient definition and
2212-8271 ©system,
production 2018 The it
Authors. Publishedtobyhave
is important Elsevier B.V. knowledge
a precise comparison of different product families. Addressing this
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 51st CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems.

2212-8271©©2017
2212-8271 2018The
The Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier B.V. B.V.
Peer-review
Peer-review under
under responsibility
responsibility of scientific
of the the scientific committee
committee of the of theCIRP
28th 51stDesign
CIRP Conference
Conference2018.
on Manufacturing Systems.
10.1016/j.procir.2018.03.241
 Susann Kärcher et al. / Procedia CIRP 72 (2018) 1142–1147
2 Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2018) 000–000
3. State of the art
3.1. Established methods for assembly process monitoring
So far, there are many possibilities to track the time of
manual assembly processes, but all are associated with great
effort: The determination of actual process times for example,
is done by an expert through external recording following a
technique developed by the association for work design,
industrial organization and company development (REFA)
[4]. Before the measurement, the whole assembly process
needs to be described step by step. This enables a detailed
analysis of the time study [5].
Alternatively to a detailed time study other methods are
possible, like self-recording by the assembly operator himself
or a time estimation through a survey with the engineering
department and shop floor staff. Besides this, the REFA multi-
moment observation technique is one more method to
minimize the effort of data collection, but it is less precise
than an external recording of all process steps [4].
For processes without a detailed assembly plan, an analysis
can be made by first observing and recording the process, and
separating it afterwards using the video footage. This,
however, requires significant effort in post-processing.
Nowadays, the determination of time can be supported by
software tools, like apps [6, 7, 8], in which data can be
entered. These tools offer assistance in data documentation
and evaluation. The main tasks, such as structuring the process
into single steps, defining the measuring points, tracking the
process variables, for example the weight of the part which is
moved, and the measurement effort of the steps itself, still
need to be done manually.
Another method to reach target-times without measuring
the actual-times are systems of predetermined times. The most
common system in Germany is the MTM (Methods-Time-
Measurement)-Method [9]. The idea behind MTM is to split
every manual movement into a combination of different basic
motion types. For the basic motions times are specified by
standard values [10]. MTM can be used even before a process
is implemented, but needs a lot of personal effort and trained
staff.
The following figure shows the relationship between data
quality and costs of data generation and processing.
Fig. 1. Data quality and costs of data generating and processing.
1143
All presented state-of-the-art methods to track times of
manual assembly processes are not sensor-based. The
generation of data is associated with a high effort of manual
work. That is why the costs of data generation and processing
increase with the quality of the data.
3.2. Sensor-based assembly process monitoring
Because gaining a high data quality with the established
methods induce a lot of man power, research in the field of
sensor-based systems is on the rise.
In automated production environments, sensor-based
applications range from support of production processes to
vision-based handling systems and fault detection as well as
predictive maintenance. In manual assembly systems the use
of sensors to track and support the manufacturing process is
less common. As production activities can usually be
determined by body posture, arm movements and hand
gestures, body-worn sensors are often the most suitable choice
for tracking and identifying production activities [11].
There are several approaches that use motion capturing
techniques for the ergonomic assessment of assembly
operations. Gudehus [12] uses data from a gyroscope-based
motion capturing system, worn on the body for semi-
automatic identification of postures during assembly
operations. The worker positions are then coded in accordance
with the Working Posture Analysing System (OWAS) [13]
and evaluated with the Lundqvist Index. Bellmann et al. [14]
propose to use camera-based recordings for automated
analysis, ergonomic assessment and identification of
improvement potential of workspaces. The system is
supposed to give real-time feedback without the need for the
presence of an ergonomics expert. Härtel et al. [15] present a
hybrid motion capturing system consisting of a marker-based
system and an inertial measurement unit (IMU). The latter is
used as redundancy in case the observational methods do not
provide applicable data. The workstation is evaluated by the
Ergonomic Assessment Worksheet (EAWS).
Numerous studies propose to use devices developed for
computer games to collect motion data. Diego-Mas et al. [16]
use Microsoft's Kinect™ sensor system consisting of a color
camera, an infrared emitter, an infrared depth sensor, a multi-
array microphone and a 3-axis accelerometer to record body
positions. The collected data is processed to perform an
OWAS posture assessment. The comparison of the results
with those of human observers leads Diego-Mas et al. to the
conclusion that low-cost range sensors provide valuable data
in the examined use case, but are not suitable for the
application in real work environments, e.g. due to lack of
accuracy. A more recent version of the Kinect™ was used by
Mgbemena et al. [17] to detect manual handling gestures such
as lifting and lowering operations in real-time. While the
detection of handling activities in a training environment
reached high accuracy, gestures could not be detected at
angles below 60° and above 120° in other locations and a
different environment.
Schirra [18] reviews the application of motion capture in
combination with virtual reality (VR) for ergonomics
assessment as well as for validation of assembly activities in
1144 Susann Kärcher et al. / Procedia CIRP 72 (2018) 1142–1147
Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2018) 000–000
the context of manufacturability of the product and
accessibility of the mounting location. An assembly planning
system with motion capture and VR techniques is already
presented by Bullinger et al. [19]. Electromagnetic sensors
track positions of the head, hand and feet for a virtual
representation of the operator’s body. Data gloves capture
information on the orientation of the hand and fingers to
analyze the interaction between the operator and virtual
objects. Gestures detected during the virtual assembly and the
disassembly of components are set into a relationship to MTM
basic movements to calculate planning times for the assembly
operation and a logical assembly sequence. A similar
approach is carried out by Ma et al. [20]. A hybrid tracking
system, including eight CCD cameras for optical motion-
tracking and a data glove, collects information on body
motion and hand gestures of a worker performing a manual
handling task. After performing automatic motion
recognition, the operation is evaluated with the Maynard
Operation Sequence Technique (MOST), a simplified motion-
time evaluation derived from MTM. Both approaches show
limitations: [19] is limited to seated operations (see
[20] p.341); in [20] not all MOST motions could be
recognized automatically. Instead of realizing a fully
automated time study Elneklave and Gilad [21] improve the
traditional videotape analysis approach. On average, time
savings of 43 percent were attained by using enhanced video
software during the conduction of MOST analysis for five
case studies, compared to a standard video cassette recorder.
This software includes advanced playback options,
measurement of distances implicated in the tasks executed by
the operators and a work sampling module.
Among other approaches, motion capture is also applied to
the training of manufacturing personnel. Müller et al.
supplement a workplace with a Kinect™ sensor and a
learning environment containing computer supported
instructions and an e-learning module. An algorithm extracts
the position of the worker’s hands from the sensor data,
determines the individual operation and informs the operator
about the next step of the assembly process. During the study,
the initial learning of the given assembly process could not be
accelerated compared to the training with paper-based
instruction due to – among other things – challenges in hand
tracking in different lighting conditions [22]. Stiefmeier et al.
[11] choose wearable activity tracking to support the training
and work of assembly line operators. The study emphasizes
the importance of redundant and diverse sensor systems to
ensure reliable tracking of assembly steps. Apart from
wearable sensors (Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU), Radio
Frequency Identification (RFID) reader, force-sensitive
resistors (FSR)) further sensors are placed on tools (IMU,
RFID tags) and the main assembly (FSR, magnetic switches)
where the sensors on the assembly were most crucial for
activity recognition. The task tracking is implemented through
with a finite state machine approach that identifies the
transition between individual activities by the presence and
absence of signal combinations. In the second scenario, which
was not conducted in a training environment, 27 sensors were
integrated into a jacket, as sensors on assemblies were not
applicable. Activity recognition was done through data
3
segmentation and encoding the data into continuous strings
which are matched against motion string templates [11]. The
approach reached activity recognition rates close to 100
percent in the first scenario and 74 percent in the second
setting. In [23] a single wrist-worn IMU is sufficient to
distinguish between hammering, screwing with a screwdriver
or a power drill, spanner use and null data with an average
accuracy of almost 88 percent. The classification was done
using features derived from acceleration and angular speed
data, as well as input into a nearest neighbor method.
In contrast to the human-centric motion capture approaches
[24] focuses on real-time object tracking in a manufacturing
environment. Wang et al. propose to attach RFID tags to
every object moving along an assembly line and to evenly
equip the working area with RFID readers. This allows for
real-time object position and movement path prediction and
tracking, thereby permitting real-time planning and control of
the manufacturing assembly line.
As a result of industry 4.0, the number of assistance
systems for biomechanical analyses has increased. Assistance
systems can be applied to provide process workflow and
assembly support for the operative personnel, using computer
vision-based tracking systems such as depth cameras to
capture e.g. the withdrawal of material or to recognize parts
and their orientation. [25] Parallel in-situ projections or
visualizations of workflow and process data with mixed reality
systems provide additional support for the targeted and guided
production process. Component mix-up can be prevented and
the assembly process is less error-prone [26].
4. Research gaps
The state of the art shows that systems for the detection of
manual assembly steps already exist. These systems are
generally used for quality monitoring or training, for example
to recognize whether all the necessary process steps have been
taken. The systems normally must be taught in advance: It is
usually necessary to define a selection of possible processes
or acquire an exact knowledge of the processes. But in
particular, when assembling with long processing times, there
is no predefined process order or information about individual
process steps are missing. Therefore, a more flexible system is
necessary. Other limitations of previous approaches using
sensors to record manual assembly processes are amongst
others:
• Most systems use body-worn sensors: The human-oriented
evaluation of work processes is one approach to acquire
processing times. This could cause problems in the field of
privacy protection and these sensors can handicap the
worker.
• The use of systems with motion tracking is often
associated with great effort (costs, time). Moreover, the
movements of humans are recorded in great detail. In
terms of production optimization, however, the process
view is more interesting than human movements.
• The assembly detection systems are so far essentially
aligned and evaluated in test environments (no real
workspace environment, short duration).
 Susann Kärcher et al. / Procedia CIRP 72 (2018) 1142–1147 1145
4 Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2018) 000–000

To sum up, there was the desire for a solution with

maximum flexibility that can be used for production
optimization in all manual assemblies and that defines its own
processes.

5. Analysis system

This paper presents a system for automatic analysis of

manual assembly processes focusing on the assembly process
itself. Relevant process data are generated through connecting Fig. 3. Tools with sensors.
on-site production equipment with alternative digital sensors
and data acquisition systems. Acquired data are used for A wide range of different sensors is required, because the
production optimization, scheduling or control. detection of each different process step needs an individual
The system can be adapted to every assembly process sensor combination. Which sensors are needed to identify a
because of its modular and scalable structure. After acquiring certain process step depends on the used tools, material, part
the data, algorithms for a data processing and an evaluation size, part number and movements. Table 1 shows the selected
are used. Fig. 2 shows the steps from the assembly process to sensors which are in use today.
process times and evaluation results.
Table 1: List of currently used sensors
Type of sensor Task
RFID tags and reader Localization of part or tool
Accelerometer Vibration detection
Magnetometer Movement by magnetic
field detection
Gyroscope Movement detection
Thermometer and hygrometer Temperature and humidity
measurement
Ambient light sensor Movement detection
Electronic scales Weight measurement, part
extraction check
Distance sensors (capacitive and Part extraction check
inductive)
Fig. 2. Steps to obtain process times and evaluation results.
This list will be expanded through further research and
The system consists of three different layers: development. With the final sensor selection, the goal to have
a sensor box including all sensors necessary to detect all of
• Setting on the shop floor: The system is based on sensors the main assembly process steps should be reached. The
that are installed directly on the shop floor. primary challenges in identifying the right sensors are the size
• IT-architecture (interfaces and services): The sensors are and the sensitivity of the sensors. The sensors ought not
then connected to interfaces and services accessing them. interfere with the assembly process by handicapping the
• Evaluation: Finally, at the top level the data are analyzed. workers and have to be resistant to environmental impact.

5.1. Setting 5.2. IT-architecture

Sensors and measurement technologies are installed on
parts, products, tools and operation materials. There are no
sensors installed on workers. The system uses contacting and
non-contacting sensors and the recording is wireless.
To use the system, the sensors have to be positioned and
installed. After this, no further intervention by an employee is
necessary and the data acquisition runs. The following figure
shows tools equipped with sensors.
The system is built in Node.js and is responsible for the
data acquisition, device management, processing of the data
and the understandable visualization of the results as well as
the adjustment of the data processing. The goal is to provide
the user with high flexibility and high fault tolerance. The
presented system uses MongoDB, a NoSQL database.
It obtains all information through external sensors. These
sensors are always a part of a device by definition. Only
devices are able to communicate directly to the system, in the
present case via Wi-Fi and USB. A sketch of the device and
the sensors connected to the system is visualized in Fig. 4.
1146 Susann Kärcher et al. / Procedia CIRP 72 (2018) 1142–1147
Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2018) 000–000 5

is not moving’), hitting, vibration, spinning, lifting, etc. The

following Fig. 7 illustrates the linking between processings.

Fig. 4. Device structure.

The user is now able to link the devices and their

containing sensors to an entity. This enables to assign every
dataset from a sensor to an entity. The entity is a database
document which can be any physical object which has to be
Fig. 7. Processing.
tracked, for example hammer, drilling machine, workpiece,
working desk, etc. Fig. 5 shows an entity and the enclosed
Due to this standardization of the processing a high degree
devices from a database schema view.
of reusability is given. The benefits are on the side of the
programmer and the user. The programmer has to write the
code only once per entity type and the user has to handle just
one model to link the processing. The data structure aims to
have an impact on the design process experienced by the user.
To simplify the data analyzing work even more, the
processing can own an interface for different parameters like
Fig. 5. Entity structure.
thresholds and limit values. These parameters have a filter
function and an impact on the output of the processing. Fig. 8
Entities can be separated into entity groups, for better
shows a simplified sketch of an interface in a processing.
structure and to simplify the process of creating context. This
is especially useful for detecting connected workpieces in
assembly.
Entities as well as entity groups own a set of processes.
Processes are templates of calculations or data manipulation
algorithms. The combining of a sensor with a process
template is called a “processing”. A processing is a unique
function with predefined input. The amount of inputs and
Fig. 8. Interface.
outputs is not limited. An entity can have more than one
processing and the result of each processing is a condition.
At present, the number of processing layers is still kept to a
Fig. 6 shows the connection between entity, device and
minimum which is going to be expanded in the future.
process templates which lead to a processing.
5.3. Evaluation

Each attached sensor transmits its measured values to the

Fig. 6. Process templates.
To achieve a high level of meaningful conditions, the
processing output is taken and used as input for new
processing calculations. The higher a processing layer, the
more data and information has already been processed.
The first processing layer deals with sensor data, the
following processing layers use conditions as input.
Conditions are always binary, and the process algorithm is
based on simple logical operations. The inputs in the first
processing layer are limited by the physical unit like
temperature, momentum, density, pressure etc. which are
defined by the sensor output. The input of the following
processing layers is limited by the condition type. Condition
types can vary depending on the entity. Possible condition
types could be movement (e.g. ‘part/tool is moving’, ‘part/tool
evaluation system over the course of time. As a result,
different sensor values are available for each time stamp.
Tests have proven that often several sensors have to be
evaluated at the same time in order to come to a conclusion
about the process step. As described in chapter 5.2,
information is aggregated more and more with increasing
processing layer levels and finally transformed into
information about the assembly process, e.g. with the help of
algorithms and patterns. In the future the system could
provide for instance the following evaluation:
• total processing time
• time of each process step (commencement and ending
date)
• sequence of assembly processes
• localization
• quality control
• condition monitoring
 Susann Kärcher et al. / Procedia CIRP 72 (2018) 1142–1147
6 Author name / Procedia CIRP 00 (2018) 000–000
As soon as the system has recognized which process steps
are carried out, optimization methods can work on the data
basis.
6. Benefit
The approach presented in this publication provides great
benefit: Manual assembly processes can be evaluated and the
efficiency and effectiveness of the assembly process can be
improved. The system creates transparency, so that manual
assembly processes can be planned, scheduled and controlled
better. This will save costs and time along with an
improvement in quality.
Improved planning leads to superior planning of capacities
as there is now transparency on the time individual process
steps take. Efficiency will increase and assembly processes
can be improved and optimized. In addition, orders can be
planned better with reliable information on throughput times.
The system also provides an essential advantage in the
flexible analysis: It can be applied in all use cases and high
time savings for analysis and further evaluation can be
achieved. Moreover, the historical evaluation can be changed
by adjusting the limit values and tolerances later on.
Manual assembly processes are automatically and
continuously analyzed. This leads to a homogeneous result of
all considered processes. Even if several processes are
considered on different days, the analysis is always the same.
In the long term, a database will be set up with experience
data which could then be used for other assembly tasks.
Additionally, the system does not interfere with the process
and the process does not have to be interrupted. Further
advantages are the choice of sensors, because no sensors are
attached to workers and no optical motion detection takes
place.
7. Conclusion and outlook
In conclusion, an approach for automated capture and
analysis of manual assembly operations has been presented.
Manual assembly processes can be recorded and evaluated,
saving time and creating new possibilities for evaluation.
Further work will be carried out to improve accuracy and
to transfer the prototype to industrial application. With a
rising number of implemented use cases the data base is
constantly enhanced and due to additional sensors, more and
more data will be collected. In addition, the evaluation
algorithms are improving. Consequently, the evaluation will
be more accurate. In the future, less information will have to
be made available to the system.
Furthermore, the negative impact of disturbing influences
should be investigated. Also, the variable granularity or
detailing can still be adjusted; however, more experience in
industrial application is necessary. Lastly, the influence on the
worker by the system is to be analyzed.
References
[1] Koren, Y. The Global Manufacturing Revolution. Hoboken, New Jersey:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2010. p. 15.
1147
[2] Gairola A. Montagegerechtes Konstruieren. Ein Beitrag zur
Konstruktionsmethodik. Diss. TH Darmstadt; 1981. p. 9.
[3] Bauer D, Maurer T, Henkel C, Bildstein A. Big-Data-Analytik:
Datenbasierte Optimierung Produzierender Unternehmen. Studie
Stuttgart; 2017. p. 20.
[4] Lotter B, Wiendahl H-P. Montage in der industriellen Produktion. 2.
Auflage, Berlin Heidelberg: Springer Verlag; 2012.
[5] REFA Methodenlehre der Betriebsorganisation – Grundlagen der
Arbeitsgestaltung. München: REFA Bundesverband e. V.; 1993. p. 81-
125.
[6] TiCon TS, in: Apple App Store https://itunes.apple.com/de/app/ticon-
ts/id1207860674?mt=8 last accessed 30-11-2017
[7] UMT Plus, in: Apple App Store https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/umt-
plus/id501809425?mt=8 last accessed 30-11-2017
[8] W2MO Process Study, in: Google Play Store
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.logivations.w2mo.mob
ile.time.study last accessed 30-11-2017
[9] Picker C. Prospektive Zeitbestimmung für nicht wertschöpfende
Montagetätigkeiten. Technische Universität Dortmund, Fakultät
Maschinenbau, Dissertation. Aachen: Shaker Verlag; 2006.
[10] Syska A. Produktionsmanagement. Wiesbaden: Betriebswirtschaftlicher
Verlag Gabler; 2006.
[11] Stiefmeier T, et al. Wearable activity tracking in car manufacturing.
IEEE Pervasive Computing, 2008:7(2):49.
[12] Gudehus T. Entwicklung eines Verfahrens zur ergonomischen
Bewertung von Montagetätigkeiten durch motion-capturing. Kassel:
kassel university press GmbH; 2009.
[13] Karhu O, Kansi P, Kuorinka I. Correcting working postures in industry:
a practical method for analysis. Applied ergonomics, 2006:8(4):199-201.
[14] Bellmann VK, et al. Development of a System for a Real Time
Ergonomic Assessment. 3rd International Conference on Production
Automation and Mechanical Engineering on 26th - 27th August 2017, in
Montreal, Canada, 2017.
[15] Härtel T, et al. Capturing and Assessment of Human Motion during
Manual Assembly Operation. First International Symposium on Digital
Human Modeling, Conference Proceedings, 2011.
[16] Diego-Mas JA, Alcaide-Marzal J. Using Kinect™ sensor in
observational methods for assessing postures at work. Applied
ergonomics, 2014:45(4):976-985.
[17] Mgbemena CE, et al. Gesture Detection Towards Real-Time Ergonomic
Analysis for Intelligent Automation Assistance. Advances in Ergonomics
of Manufacturing: Managing the Enterprise of the Future. Basel: Springer
International Publishing; 2016. p. 217-228.
[18] Schirra R. Entwicklung eines Systems zur immersiven
Arbeitssystemgestaltung mit CAD-Schnittstelle. Diss. Uni Stuttgart;
2009.
[19] Bullinger HJ; Richter M, Seidel K‐A. Virtual assembly planning. Human
Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries,
2000:10(3):331-341.
[20] Ma L, et al. A framework for interactive work design based on motion
tracking, simulation, and analysis. Human Factors and Ergonomics in
Manufacturing & Service Industries, 2010:20(4):339-352.
[21] Elnekave M, Gilad I. Rapid video-based analysis system for advanced
work measurement. International journal of production research,
2006:44(2):271-290.
[22] Müller BC, Nguyen TD, Dang QV, Duc BM, Seliger G, Krüger J,
Kohl H. Motion Tracking Applied in Assembly for Worker Training in
different Locations. Procedia CIRP, 2016:48:460-465. p. 461.
[23] Koskimaki H, et al. Activity recognition using a wrist-worn inertial
measurement unit: A case study for industrial assembly lines. Control and
Automation, 2009. MED'09. 17th Mediterranean Conference on. IEEE;
2009:401-405.
[24] Wang J; Luo Z; Wong EC. RFID-enabled tracking in flexible assembly
line. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
2010:46(1):351-360.
[25] Krüger J, Wang L, Verl A, Bauernhansl T, et al. Innovative control of
assembly systems and lines. CIRP Annals, 2017:66:707–730.
[26] Fraunhofer IPA. https://www.ipa.fraunhofer.de/de/presse/presseinforma
tionen/2015-05-18_gruenes-licht-fuer-naechsten-montageschritt.html
last accessed 30-11-2017