End-Users’ Augmented Reality Utilization for Architectural Design Review
Source abstract
Abstract
To effectively use augmented reality (AR) technology for end-user involved design collaboration, it is necessary to ensure the effectiveness of the AR system from the end-user’s perspective. However, most efforts have mainly focused on technological development, and as such, limited attention has been paid to the end-user’s application of the AR system. Therefore, this study investigates how the AR system affects architectural design review based on the user’s perspectives. Three different display systems presenting a 3D model including a 2D screen, VR, and AR were tested, and a total of 76 participants evaluated visual presentation quality, perceived acceptability, and user experience according to their usage of the visualization platform types during the design review activities. Compared to other systems, the results indicated that the AR system could be more effective in reviewing the visual elements of a building. Furthermore, AR showed the highest ratings for acceptance level and user experience. The innovation provided by AR created a positive user experience, despite its remaining challenges to be resolved in terms of functionality. Since it is expected that the use of AR can be promoted by overcoming certain technological limitations, this study contributes to guiding AR system applications for end-users involved in the design review process.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Augmented Reality Applications · Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts · Spatial Cognition and Navigation
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, 11 Yuk Choi Rd., Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China
Seoul Institute of Technology, Maebongsan-ro 37, Mapo-gu, Seoul 03909, Korea
References (47)
Show source-provided references
1. A theoretical framework of a BIM-based multi-disciplinary collaboration platform10.1016/j.autcon.2010.09.011 ↗
2. Improved Design Review through Web Collaboration10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2004)20:2(51) ↗
3. Mohammadpour, A., Karan, E., Asadi, S., and Rothrock, L. (2015, January 21–23). Measuring End-User Satisfaction in the Design of Building Projects Using Eye-Tracking Technology. Proceedings of the Computing in Civil Engineering 2015, Austin, TX, USA.10.1061/9780784479247.070 ↗
4. Lee, N., and Kim, Y. (2018, January 2–4). A Conceptual Framework for Effective Communication in Construction Management: Information Processing and Visual Communication. Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress 2018, New Orleans, LA, USA.10.1061/9780784481264.052 ↗
5. Jin, H., and Kim, M. (2020, August 03). Architectural VR Realization Using Game Engine. Available online: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5253/2be52799cc92c795ee10c9503f92eb0053f2.pdf.
6. Utilizing a 3D Game Engine to Develop a Virtual Design Review System
7. Integrating BIM and augmented reality for interactive architectural visualisation10.1108/CI-03-2014-0019 ↗
8. Chiabert, P., Bouras, A., Noël, F., and Ríos, J. (2018). Mixed Reality Tools as an Enabler for Improving Operation and Maintenance in Small and Medium Enterprises. Product Lifecycle Management to Support Industry 4.0, Turin, Italy, 2–4 July 2018, Springer International Publishing.
9. A Survey of Augmented Reality Technologies, Applications and Limitations10.20870/IJVR.2010.9.2.2767 ↗
10. Immersive virtual environments versus physical built environments: A benchmarking study for building design and user-built environment explorations10.1016/j.autcon.2015.03.020 ↗
11. Spillinger, R.S. (2000). Adding Value to the Facility Acquisition Process: Best Practices for Reviewing Facility Designs, National Academy Press. Federal Facilities Council Technical Report.
12. Design Review Checking System with Corporate Lessons Learned10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2003)129:5(475) ↗
13. Wang, X., and Tsai, J.J.-H. (2011). An Immersive Virtual Reality Mock-Up for Design Review of Hospital Patient Rooms. Collaborative Design in Virtual Environments, Springer. Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering.
14. Managing the needs of end-users in the design and delivery of construction projects10.1108/02632771011011378 ↗
15. Varun, K., Zhengbo, Z., Burcu, A., and Justin, R. (2016). Evaluation and Comparison of Different Virtual Reality Environments towards Supporting Tasks Done on a Virtual Construction Site. Constr. Res. Congr., 2371–2381.
16. 11-1: Invited Paper: Towards the Ultimate Mixed Reality Experience: HoloLens Display Architecture Choices10.1002/sdtp.11586 ↗
17. Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence10.1111/j.1460-2466.1992.tb00812.x ↗
18. Kinateder, M., Ronchi, E., Nilsson, D., Kobes, M., Müller, M., Pauli, P., and Mühlberger, A. (2014, January 7–10). Virtual reality for fire evacuation research. Proceedings of the 2014 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, Warsaw, Poland.10.15439/2014F94 ↗
19. Suitability of virtual prototypes to support human factors/ergonomics evaluation during the design10.1016/j.apergo.2016.02.015 ↗
20. Augmented reality: A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum10.1117/12.197321 ↗
21. Virtual reality and mixed reality for virtual learning environments10.1016/j.cag.2005.10.004 ↗
22. Using Animated Augmented Reality to Cognitively Guide Assembly10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000184 ↗
23. A critical review of virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) applications in construction safety10.1016/j.autcon.2017.11.003 ↗
24. A Virtual Construction Environment for preconstruction planning10.1016/S0926-5805(02)00047-X ↗
25. Using driving simulators to assess driving safety10.1016/j.aap.2010.03.006 ↗
26. Khalid, C.M.L., Mohamed, Z., Fathi, M.S., Zakiyudin, M.Z., Rawai, N., and Abedi, M. (2020, June 27). The Potential of Augmented Reality Technology for Pre-Construction. Available online: /AMM.405-408.3419.10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.405-408.3419 ↗
27. Furht, B. (2011). Evaluating Augmented Reality Systems. Handbook of Augmented Reality, Springer.10.1007/978-1-4614-0064-6 ↗
28. Augmented Versus Virtual Reality in Education: An Exploratory Study Examining Science Knowledge Retention When Using Augmented Reality/Virtual Reality Mobile Applications10.1089/cyber.2018.0150 ↗
29. Kivrak, S., Arslan, G., and Tuncan, M. (2020, June 27). Implementing Augmented Reality in Construction Projects. Available online: /AMM.719-720.197.10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.719-720.197 ↗
30. JeongWook, S., Ken-Yu, L., and Rojas Eddy, M. (2011). Developing and Testing a 3D Video Game for Construction Safety Education. Comput. Civ. Eng., 867–874.
31. Sneha, B., and Behzad, E. (2015). State-of-the-Art Review of Virtual Reality Environment Applications in Construction Safety. AEI, 457–468.
32. Jun, Z., and Issa Raja, R.A. (2015). Collecting Fire Evacuation Performance Data Using BIM-Based Immersive Serious Games for Performance-Based Fire Safety Design. Comput. Civ. Eng., 612–619.
33. Broll, W., Lindt, I., Ohlenburg, J., Wittkämper, M., Yuan, C., Novotny, T., Fatah gen Schieck, A., Mottram, C., and Strothmann, A. (2004). ARTHUR: A Collaborative Augmented Environment for Architectural Design and Urban Planning. JVRB, 1.
34. Tonn, C.D. (2007, January 26–29). Simulating the Atmosphere of Spaces. Proceedings of the Predicting the Future 25th eCAADe Conference, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.10.52842/conf.ecaade.2007.169 ↗
35. Compatibility issues in Augmented Reality systems for AEC: An experimental prototype study10.1016/j.autcon.2005.06.002 ↗
36. BIM based collaborative and interactive design process using computer game engine for general end-users10.1186/s40327-015-0018-2 ↗
37. Heuristic evaluation of virtual reality applications10.1016/j.intcom.2004.05.001 ↗
38. Tang, A., Owen, C., Biocca, F., and Mou, W. (2003, January 5–10). Comparative effectiveness of augmented reality in object assembly. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA.10.1145/642611.642626 ↗
39. Cognitive and usability engineering methods for the evaluation of clinical information systems10.1016/j.jbi.2004.01.003 ↗
40. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology10.2307/249008 ↗
41. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9 ↗
42. Questionnaire approach based on the technology acceptance model for mobile tracking on patient progress applications10.3844/jcssp.2013.763.770 ↗
43. A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 ↗
44. Marcus, A. (2014). Applying the User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ) in Different Evaluation Scenarios. Design, User Experience, and Usability. Theories, Methods, and Tools for Designing the User Experience, Proceedings of the Third International Conference, DUXU 2014, Held as Part of HCI International 2014, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, 22–27 June 2014, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-319-07668-3 ↗
45. Visually induced motion sickness can be alleviated by pleasant odors10.1007/s00221-015-4209-9 ↗
46. Behavioral Methods of Alleviating Motion Sickness: Effectiveness of Controlled Breathing and a Music Audiotape10.2310/7060.2003.31768 ↗
47. Virtual reality induced symptoms and effects (VRISE): Comparison of head mounted display (HMD), desktop and projection display systems10.1016/j.displa.2007.09.005 ↗