IMMERSIVE DIGITAL TWINS OF AN INDUSTRIAL FORGE ENGINEERING EDUCATION

IMMERSIVE DIGITAL TWINS OF AN INDUSTRIAL FORGE ENGINEERING EDUCATION

S. Fleury, C. Baudouin, P. Bondesan (2024).  IMMERSIVE DIGITAL TWINS OF AN INDUSTRIAL FORGE ENGINEERING EDUCATION .

The rapid and relentless pace of technological advancement over recent years has had a profound impact on the realm of education. This dynamic transformation has paved the way for a host of new possibilities and innovations that are reshaping the educational landscape. One of the most noteworthy developments within this technological revolution is the advent of virtual and augmented realities. These immersive technologies have become pivotal in shaping the evolution of educational tools and systems across universities worldwide. For examples of this phenomenon, one can refer to recent works such as Sandyk et al. (2023) and Kontio et al. (2023). The "JENII project" is an example of initiative in the sphere of immersive education, which is being spearheaded by the Arts et Metiers Institute of Technology. This project is set on a course to revolutionize engineering education by designing a suite of immersive and interactive digital twins. While Engineering Learning Workplaces are not physically present, the immersion enabled by the technology, when coupled with a machine's digital twin, closely replicates the genuine interaction an engineering student would encounter in an industrial environment. Thus, within the framework of the Conceive-Design-Implement-Operate (CDIO) approach, these immersive digital twins are envisioned as virtual counterparts to the workplaces described in Standard 6. However, immersive digital twins are not static; instead, they offer the prospect of continuous optimization to provide engineering students with a dynamic learning experience. A important attribute of these digital twins is their potential to catalyze Active Learning, a fundamental component of CDIO (Standard 8). They offer students unfettered access to a set of realistic exercises, during both classroom sessions and independent study. These exercises are meticulously designed to simulate actions that students would undertake on actual machines, fostering a hands-on learning environment. What sets these digital twins apart is their ability to allow students to repeat exercises as many times as needed, replicating real-world scenarios. This affords a unique opportunity for students to refine their skills and gain mastery over complex engineering tasks.

Authors (New): 
Sylvain Fleury
Cyrille Baudouin
Pierre Bondesan
Affiliations: 
HESAM University, Paris, France
Keywords: 
Digital Twins
Virtual reality
Engineering education
cognitive psychology
Immersive Learning
CDIO Standard 6
CDIO Standard 8
Year: 
2024
Reference: 
Bringula, R. P., Fosgate, I. C. O., Garcia, N. P. R., & Yorobe, J. L. M. (2018). Effects of Pedagogical Agents on Students’ Mathematics Performance : A Comparison Between Two Versions. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(5), 701‑722. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117722494: 
https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117722494
Craig, S. D., & Schroeder, N. L. (2017). Reconsidering the voice effect when learning from a virtual human. Computers & Education, 114, 193‑205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.07.003: 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.07.003
Christmann, O., Fleury, S., Migaud, J., Raimbault, V., Poussard, B., Guitter, T., ... & Richir, S. (2022). Visualizing the invisible: User-centered design of a system for the visualization of flows and concentrations of particles in the air. Information Visualization, 21(3), 311-320.: 
Coşkun, S., Kayıkcı, Y., & Gençay, E. (2019). Adapting Engineering Education to Industry 4.0 Vision. Technologies, 7(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies7010010: 
https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies7010010
Dai, L., Jung, M. M., Postma, M., & Louwerse, M. M. (2022). A systematic review of pedagogical agent research : Similarities, differences and unexplored aspects. Computers & Education, 190, 104607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104607: 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104607
Davis, R. O., Vincent, J., & Park, T. (2019). Reconsidering the Voice Principle with Non-native Language Speakers. Computers & Education, 140, 103605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103605: 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103605
Evtushenko, O., Toporkova, O., Kokhashvili, N., & Yankina, E. (2023). Digitalisation in engineering education : Practice challenges and opportunities. E3S Web of Conferences, 371, 05072. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202337105072: 
https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202337105072
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Eight Ways to Promote Generative Learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 717‑741. : 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9348-9
Fleury, S., Bernard, F., Paquin, R., Blanchard, P., & Richir, S. (2023) Augmented and virtual reality simulation in industry. Computer. : 
https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2023.3283311
Goncharov, V. N., Nesmeyanov, E. E., Kolosova, O. U., Arutyunyan, V. V., & Ivashova, V. A. (2019). Analysis of the modern science and technology in the context of the concept of CDIO. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1353(1), 012135.: 
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1353/1/012135
Keith, T. Z., Diamond-Hallam, C., & Fine, J. G. (2004). Longitudinal Effects of In-School and Out-of-School Homework on High School Grades. School Psychology Quarterly, 19(3), 187.: 
Klingenberg, S., Fischer, R., Zettler, I., & Makransky, G. (2023). Facilitating learning in immersive virtual reality : Segmentation, summarizing, both or none? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(1), 218‑230.: 
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12741
Kontio, E., Ravyse, W., Saarenpä, T., Haavisto, T., Luimula, M. Pizarro-Lucas, E., Dorado-Diaz, P. I., Sanchez, P.L. (2023). Experiences on the creation of a multi-disciplinary course in a metaverse environment. Proceedings of the 19th International CDIO Conference, Trondheim, Normay.: 
Malmqvist, J., Knutson Wedel, M., Lundqvist, U., Edström, K., Rosén, A., Fruergaard Astrup, T., ... & Kamp, A. (2019). Towards CDIO standards 3.0. In Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference (pp. 512-529).: 
Mayer, R. E., Makransky, G., & Parong, J. (2023). The promise and pitfalls of learning in immersive virtual reality. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 39(11), 2229-2238.: 
Neaga, I. (2019). Applying industry 4.0 and education 4.0 to engineering education. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA). : 
https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi0.13859
Oh, C. S., Bailenson, J. N. and Welch, G. F. (2018). A systematic review of social presence: Definition, antecedents, and implications. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 114.: 
Parong, J., & Mayer, R. E. (2018). Learning science in immersive virtual reality. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(6), 785‑797. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000241: 
https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000241
Pataranutaporn, P., Leong, J., Danry, V., Lawson, A. P., Maes, P., & Sra, M. (2022). AI-Generated Virtual Instructors Based on Liked or Admired People Can Improve Motivation and Foster Positive Emotions for Learning. 2022 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 1‑9. : 
https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE56618.2022.9962478
Säisä, M., Määttä, S., & Roslöf, J. (2017). Integration of CDIO skills into project-based learning in higher education. In Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference (pp. 18-22).: 
Sandyk, I., Müür, M., Kuts, V., Bondarenko, Y., Pizzagalli, S. L., Rüütman, T. (2023). Pneumatics laboratory interactive educational experience development. Proceedings of the 19th International CDIO Conference, Trondheim, Norway. : 
Schmidt, S., Bruder, G., & Steinicke, F. (2019). Effects of virtual agent and object representation on experiencing exhibited artifacts. Computers & Graphics, 83, 1‑10. : 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cag.2019.06.002
Sinatra, A. M., Pollard, K. A., Files, B. T., Oiknine, A. H., Ericson, M., & Khooshabeh, P. (2021). Social fidelity in virtual agents : Impacts on presence and learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 114, 106562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106562: 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106562
Stepan, K., Zeiger, J., Hanchuk, S., Del Signore, A., Shrivastava, R., Govindaraj, S. and Iloreta, A. (2017). Immersive virtual reality as a teaching tool for neuroanatomy. In International forum of allergy & rhinology, 7(10), pp. 1006-1013.: 
Umaralieva, M. (2021). Some challenges in encouraging independent learning. Academic research in educational sciences, 2(4), 1878-1882. : 
Vogt, A., Albus, P., & Seufert, T. (2021). Learning in virtual reality: Bridging the motivation gap by adding annotations. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 645032.: 
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.645032
Go to top