The work of the AREA is largely driven by its member committees: Research, Interoperability & Standards, Safety, Human Factors, Requirements, Marketing, and Security. Each of these groups is focused on activities that contribute to the development of knowledge about the adoption of enterprise AR and the practical implementation of AR use cases. For AREA members, participation in one or more of the AREA committees is an opportunity to share expertise, interact with other experts, and make a meaningful impact on the future of enterprise AR.

This is the third in a series of blog articles exploring the committees and their work. Our guide to the AREA Requirements Committee was Brian Kononchik, the Committee’s chair and Director of Innovative Technologies at Boston Engineering.

AREA: Tell us how you got into enterprise AR.

Kononchik: About 12 years ago, I started my career working alongside a prominent advanced technology investor and visionary. Together, we worked as contractors and consultants to some big names in the consumer electronics and automotive space. During that time, I realized that the status quo is never good enough, there needs to be more. That’s when I shifted my focus to innovation instead of that status quo. That’s how I became an early adopter of VR technology, holographics, and eventually AR. After a while, I jumped to an engineering firm that did development work for Siemens, which is, of course, a very big name in manufacturing with equipment, PLCs, PLM, and CAD platforms.

While I was there, one of the largest submarine manufacturers in the world needed an innovation engineer on their advanced technology team. The assignment was to create an immersive VR experience that utilized existing CAD data to provide an experience where a user can enter a submarine, navigate freely, and plan for job assignments. That led to more projects and eventually including Augmented Reality answering the questions: How can we use AR to help shipbuilders? How can we merge AR and VR to help shipbuilders collaborate and work more effectively?

Then about five years ago, the need for AR at scale became more and more prominent. I then went to work for PTC as a Director of Product Management for the Spatial AR initiative working with big name manufacturers in the automotive, semi-conductor, and manufacturing equipment space. That experience eventually brought me over to Boston Engineering where I’m now leading the Industry 4.0, Innovative Technology initiatives. I’m all about giving people value, and enterprise AR is delivering on that promise.

AREA: For our readers who aren’t familiar with it, what does the AREA Requirements Committee do?

Kononchik: We’re working in collaboration with a lot of big organizations involved with the AREA to help define global standards for hardware and software. When I say hardware, I am talking about mobile devices like the iPhone or Galaxy s20, Assisted Reality devices like RealWear, and fully-immersive, head-mounted displays, like the Magic Leap and HoloLens 2. We’re trying to define a set of standards that people could build hardware against. Having universal standards will allow for increased technology adoption.

On the software side, we’re trying to do something similar. We’re trying to lay out a set of standards for people that want to go build AR enterprise applications. After all the requirements are finalized, the next big thing we’re going to do is build out an automated process to help someone understand the starting point for addressing their particular use case. So, you would input your industry and use case. Say you’re in the oil and gas industry and you have the challenge of individuals collaborating while they are not in the same location. That would be a remote assistance use case. You then need to input your environment. In this scenario, you specify that the work is being performed mainly outside. Those are your three starting variables: oil and gas, remote assistance, and outside. We’re working on an automated process that recommends options; the more details you provide, the better the recommendation. We’re not just trying to define requirements. We’re trying to define requirements for use cases and provide a way to streamline adoption within an organization.

AREA: It sounds like you’re working two sides of the equation here. You’re pushing for standards on one end and providing guidance to adopters on the other.

Kononchik: Correct. We have our set of standards being developed, and then we have the AREA Statement of Needs, or ASoN, tool. It’s designed to help others identify the AR setups related to their use cases. These setups can be actions taken right away to get AR implemented into their organizations.

AREA: On the standards side, are you looking at work that standards bodies are already doing and making recommendations about which standards to implement?

Kononchik: It’s a combination. For example, we break hardware down into many different categories: wearability, sensors, communications, audio, and so forth. For each category, you have a breakdown of different device types. For example, sensors. You have mobile, assisted, and fully immersive head-mounted devices (HMD). A requirement for a fully immersive HMD should have no fewer than two world cameras because that will help you compute your 3D world maps. A device should also have at least a single RGB camera because that will help with QR code recognition and remote assist scenarios. So, those are some of the hardware type standards being developed.

When it comes to safety, though, we reference the industry standards. There are already existing environmental standards, say regarding operational temperature range, that hardware manufacturers must follow. So, we just reference those standards that exist. And then, where standards don’t exist, we’re trying to collectively understand what can be done today and where the market is going to establish new standards which organizations do not necessarily follow today.

AREA: The ASoN tool has been available for a while now. What’s the latest on that?

Kononchik: It is currently running on an older platform, and we are in the process of upgrading the application and migrating the data over to a new platform. So, people can use it and benefit from it today, but we are looking to cleanse the tool eliminating some bloat that accumulated over time. It is accessible and fully operational today and should be used and benefited from.

AREA: Do you have a wish list of things you’d love to see the Requirements Committee get done in the near future?

Kononchik: Right now, I want to see us go through and overhaul the hardware and software requirements and collectively agree on what they should be. We’re in the process of that now. Beyond that, my goal is to make the ASoN tool everything it’s promising to be. I would love to see it work so that, if say I were an automotive industry member and I entered in a very few parameters, I would get a full spec readout of what I needed to do next and why I need to do it. It’s not there yet, but I would love to see that.

AREA: Is that doable in the near future?

Kononchik: I would say within the next year, probably yes. That granularity will be well along its way. We have a lot of great minds working with us in this Requirements Committee – a lot of industry experience and industry knowledge, and not just hardware building and software development-specific. We also have input from the community members who focus on consulting with organizations, and they really understand what customers are looking for. When we join all this knowledge together, it really comprises the three pillars of successful AR implementation and development.

AREA: What kind of people are you looking for to become part of the Requirements Committee? Are there certain skills you need or certain types of people that you’re hoping can join the group?

Kononchik: We’re looking for multiple types of skillsets. First off, we’re looking for members of the hardware and software communities – smaller startups, enterprises, and places with new innovative solutions. And within those sectors, we’re looking for product leaders. Leaders in product strategy, product management, as well as technical areas to help get a good understanding of the market demands. Really want those feasibility, viability, and desirability type people – so, your business leaders, your product leaders, your design leaders, your technical leaders from both hardware and software. And we’re looking for the “go doers” – the people that go out to a customer and work with them for a year to implement AR. We want to understand the pain points of implementation, adoption, and scalability.

The onset of the pandemic really escalated the adoption of AR, and a lot of companies are seeing challenges adopting and scaling AR. Those companies are making do with the pain of adoption. The Requirements Committee can increase the visibility of the challenges adopters are facing and make those challenges more visible to the hardware creators and software development companies. Having visibility like this allows these organization to develop a strategy that fits market demands, satisfying their business, but more importantly, the customer.

If you’re an AREA member and would like more information about joining the AREA Requirements Committee, contact Brian Kononchik or AREA Executive Director Mark Sage. If you’re not yet an AREA member but care about ensuring safety in enterprise AR, please consider joining; you can find member information here.

AREA: Are you an AR guy who got into safety, or a safety guy who got into AR?

Dr. Garrett: It’s the latter. In 2017, I was supporting the Boeing 767 tanker program when a couple of colleagues approached us in the Safety organization looking for safety and ergonomics guidelines on an Augmented Reality project using HoloLens for wiring work. We looked at each other and said, “What’s a HoloLens?” (laughs) I did some looking around and I couldn’t find any research on the safety ramifications of AR. I finally landed on some ergonomic recommendations for helicopter pilots using night vision goggles. That was the closest thing I could find, but at least it was a starting point. I put some recommendations together and very quickly became the subject matter expert for AR safety.

AREA: It sounds like everybody involved in studying safety requirements in enterprise AR has had to learn as they go along.

Dr. Garrett: It has been a very hands-on learning experience, but the technology is still a hands-on learning experience in a lot of ways. And as we’ve gone along, my interest has been pushed more into fully immersive technologies, not just the AR space. Once I became known as the AR guy, people started coming to me and asking me to help them with their VR projects. So that’s become part of my work now.

AREA: What is the AREA Safety Committee focused on right now?

Dr. Garrett: The past few years have been largely project-focused. There was the AREA Safety and Human Factors Assessment Framework and Best Practice Report. Things have changed a lot since that was published, so we’ll be doing a refresh of it. And then we put together the AREA Safety Infographic. We’ve now moved into the development of a playbook of sorts, a general guide to things to be aware of when you’re implement AR solutions from a safety perspective. What kind of infrastructure do you need? What kind of issues should you be aware of? How should you assess the environment? We’ve also brought in outside experts from academia and industry to provide their viewpoints and lessons learned. For example, at our next meeting in November, the CEO of Design Interactive will present some of the things they’ve been working on from a product design perspective, but also some of the research they’ve been involved in with their customers on usage requirements. We’ll be learning about the impact they’re beginning to see on the individuals who use AR.

AREA: What are the top AR safety issues that people are concerned about?

Dr. Garrett: Situational awareness is a big one. The restricted field of view. These are of particular concern in environments that have potential hazards. If you’re interacting with the system, you may not hear emergency or other messaging going on in your area. And with a restricted field of view, you might trip over something or bump into someone. Those are probably the top two. Cyber sickness is not generally a concern with AR, but we are starting to see some research that there are some impacts among those who are exposed for two hours or more. There is a correlation between the amount of usage and how much downtime you should have. As that research continues, we’ll be able to develop some requirements to address that issue.

AREA: What can we look forward to from the AREA Safety Committee in the near future?

Dr. Garrett: Last year, we entered into a partnership with the National Safety Council. We’re going to be working with them on the further refinement of the framework tool. It will give new AR adopters a checklist whereby they answer a series of yes/no questions to evaluate the job or their work environment from a safety perspective. In addition to the AREA sharing that framework tool with the AR ecosystem, the National Safety Council will be able to share it with their membership. We’re currently waiting for the NSC to arrange the resourcing of that work, but I expect we’ll see that completed next year.

AREA: Why should AREA members consider joining the Safety Committee?

Dr. Garrett: It’s really about having a voice and a say as to what content is being delivered to protect all employees. International standards are another area where we need a lot of support. There are standards development efforts underway right now at Underwriters Laboratories, IEEE, and ISO, and we need AR users to be represented in the room. There’s a lot of manufacturers and academics involved, but not enough AR customers, and their voices need to be heard.

If you’re an AREA member and would like more information about joining the AREA Safety Committee, contact Dr. Greg Garrett or AREA Executive Director Mark Sage. If you’re not yet an AREA member but care about ensuring safety in enterprise AR, please consider joining; you can find member information here.

AREA: How long have you been involved in standardization activities?

Perey: My role in standardization activities began in 1994 when I joined the ITU-T committee standardizing video conferencing. Seeing needs for interoperability in AR as early as 2010, I formed and led a grassroots community advocating for development of standards for AR. I have chaired dozens of meetings and workshops, and given dozens of webinars on the topics of projects and/or standards that could contribute to the advancement and adoption of open interfaces and AR interoperability. I work directly with a wide range of standards development organizations (SDO). As a member, a working group chair or co-chair, or as an invited expert, I currently contribute to nearly 20 standards. Outreach and coordination between SDOs is another passion of mine. On October 4, 2021, I chaired a tutorial coordinated with Khronos Group and ETSI ISG ARF about AR interoperability and standards in the context of the ISMAR 2021 conference. I encourage people interested in this topic and seeking to better understand what’s available to explore the tutorial website.

AREA: Tell us more about the AREA Interoperability & Standards program.

Perey: Through the Interoperability & Standards program, the AREA seeks to increase knowledge about the benefits and approaches to achieving interoperability and to advance the development of standards or other approaches to interoperability. That entails: informing AREA members and the enterprise AR ecosystem about existing standards for interoperable AR solutions through development of thought leadership content; supporting the identification of interoperability requirements in customer organizations; supporting the identification of interfaces in AR components that, through implementations, provide interoperability in enterprise AR solutions and services; engaging with organizations and members, including those dedicated to standards development and promotion of standards to provide requirements; and building a base of AR professionals who are well versed in the implementation of existing standards for AR, and promote the development and adoption of extensions to existing standards as well as new standards.

AREA: Why are standards so important to enterprise AR adoption?

Perey: The motivations for adopting standards depend on the segment of the ecosystem to which a company belongs. Let’s take the customer segment, because when technology buyers are successful, so are their partners and providers. Today, when companies begin evaluating enterprise AR use cases they do so with isolated projects (products are not integrated with enterprise systems) and using products of one or a few technology providers. In companies that are advanced in their study of AR, there can be partial or full testbeds of multiple AR technology providers, but they are often isolated from other AR projects and are not integrated with enterprise systems.

A company seeking to maintain and expand its testing within a specific technology segment (e.g., comparing multiple providers or models of hardware) or to implement at scale in their enterprise confronts significant obstacles. It has been demonstrated in other industries that when standards or open source interfaces and guidelines have been widely accepted and implemented across an ecosystem, higher technology interoperability can: reduce barriers to deployment of multivendor or multi-product solutions (also known as “integration”); lower costs of ownership; reduce risks of vendor lock-in; and increase innovation and opportunities for new sales through provider specialization. Barriers are removed and everyone benefits.

AREA: What’s on the horizon for the AREA Interoperability & Standards program?

Perey: We will continue to develop thought leadership content, through hosted webinars, white papers, and blog articles, as well as participation in relevant conferences and events. As the awareness of interoperability as a key to success rises, we will work with large enterprises deploying AR to develop their interoperability requirements and integration needs and bring them to the attention of SDOs and the AR technology providers. We will act as a conduit from SDOs to AREA member companies – providers as well as customer segment members – to share SDO draft specifications and gather and deliver feedback to them. And, where there are implementations and testing suites, we will work to support the testing of products and services that comply with international standards in real-world settings.

AREA: Why should AREA members consider participating in the Interoperability & Standards program?

Perey: This is a program that can only thrive when AR customers are actively sharing their requirements and real-world experiences. So we’re looking for AREA members to contribute to the program by preparing blog posts on topics that will share their thought leadership and raise awareness about specific or general challenges. Topics could include: key interoperability and standards requirements for enterprise AR; developing best practices for safety, human factors, and more; sharing their experiences in standards development; and recounting their experiences implementing one or more standards in specific use cases or products. AR component and solution providers will increasingly be able to showcase interoperability through AREA programs to advance interoperability such as plug-fests and testbeds. Now is the time, while AR standards are under development, to make sure your voice is heard, your needs are being considered, and your experiences are being shared.

If you’re an AREA member and would like more information about participating in the AREA Interoperability & Standards program, please contact Christine Perey. If you’re not yet an AREA member but want to see an AR ecosystem that derives the full benefit of standardization and interoperability efforts, please consider joining us. You can find membership information here.

There is a wide range of assets in urban environments: public spaces, buildings, concentrations of demography, utilities, history, movement of people and objects and so on. These assets carry significant value for all those interacting with them but the nature and manifestation of the value depends on the context and the use case.

The nature of value associated with the same asset depends on the nature of the interaction: occupancy for a realtor, history for a tourist, compliance for the Code Enforcement employee and so on – all built around the same digital twin of the host city.

Following proper authorization, head mounted displays or handheld devices can unlock the value contained in an asset, guiding and enhancing the interactions of a user with a city and its inhabitants.

This research topic also includes architecting a multipurpose Digital Twin of a set of assets, associating them with various layers of value and examining modalities of consumption from a human factors perspective.

Stakeholders

Elected and professional urban leaders: Mayors, CIOs and CISOs of urban infrastructure, Independent Software Vendors, geospatial infrastructure providers, points of interest publishers

Possible Methodologies

This research will require scanning and associating data with urban assets and developing methodologies to test different use cases and scenarios. User satisfaction and productivity studies in field trials will contribute to development of best practices for specific industries.

Research Program

This topic is a good fit with most topics focused on Smart Cities and long-range outdoor positioning.

Miscellaneous Notes

The UN has published reports about urbanization and the challenges it raises for those managing urban data.

Keywords

Public asset management, public services, scanning, smart cities, urbanization, intelligent buildings, urban growth, town and country planning, urban planning, digital twin, smart cities, street lighting

Research Agenda Categories

Technology, Business

Expected Impact Timeframe

Long

Related Publications

Using the words in this topic description and Natural Language Processing analysis of publications in the AREA FindAR database, the references below have the highest number of matches with this topic:

• Chen, K., Gonsalves, K., Guaralda, M., Turkay, S., & Kerr, J. (2019). Towards a Typology for Playable Digital Interventions in Urban Public. 2019 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality Adjunct (ISMAR-Adjunct).
• Innocent, T. (2018). Play about Place. Proceedings of the 4th Media Architecture Biennale Conference.
• Lee, L.-H. (2020). Invited Talk: Emerging Role of Digital Assistant in Augmented Reality Driven Human-City Interaction. 2020 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerCom Workshops).
• Nijholt, A. (2017). Humans as Avatars in Smart and Playable Cities. 2017 International Conference on Cyberworlds (CW).
• Zhang, L., Chen, S., Dong, H., & El Saddik, A. (2018). Visualizing Toronto City Data with HoloLens: Using Augmented Reality for a City Model. IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, 7(3), 73-80.

More publications can be explored using the AREA FindAR research tool.

Author

Peter Orban

Last Published (yyyy-mm-dd)

2021-08-31

Go to Enterprise AR Research Topic Interactive Dashboard