Integrating Virtual and Physical Practice in Project-Based Industrial Robotics Education

DOI: https://doi.org/10.62517/jnse.202617508

Author(s)

Feng Hu

Affiliation(s)

School of Robotics Engineering, Yangtze Normal University, Chongqing, China

Abstract

In Industrial Robot Technology and Applications course, even if a simulation is successful, it does not mean that students have fully mastered the concepts. At the same time, a high grade on a group assignment does not necessarily mean all members possess a high level of capability. For this problem, this paper proposes a project-based teaching reform framework for the Industrial Robot Technology and Applications courses. In this framework, the course projects extend from fundamental knowledge points to complex projects, and simulation-based teaching is conducted for a wide range of practical scenarios. In the teaching process, the simulation platform is primarily ABB RobotStudio, and robot target verification is conducted on an actual industrial robot integration system, promoting the effective integration between simulation models and real industrial robots. Based on this, the teacher needs to instruct students to compare the difference between expectations and actual operational results, and analyze the deviation reason, as well as adjust the teaching plan. Finally, course evaluation not only focuses on the final team project results but also comprehensively evaluates students’ understanding of basic principles, the code debugging process and individual performance.

Keywords

Industrial Robotics; Project-Based Learning; Virtual and Physical Laboratories; Robotstudio; Engineering Education

References

[1] Feisel, L. D., and Rosa, A. J. The role of the laboratory in undergraduate engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 2005, 94(1): 121–130. DOI: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00833.x. [2] Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., and Wiggins, A. Project-based learning: A review of the literature. Improving Schools, 2016, 19(3): 267–277. DOI: 10.1177/1365480216659733. [3] Navarro Arcas, A. R., Llorca Schenk, J. M., Jara, C. A., et al. Educational impacts on robotic engineering students of an international online project-based learning course. Education Sciences, 2024, 14(12): 1305. DOI: 10.3390/educsci14121305. [4] de Jong, T., Linn, M. C., and Zacharia, Z. C. Physical and virtual laboratories in science and engineering education. Science, 2013, 340(6130): 305–308. DOI: 10.1126/science.1230579. [5] Brinson, J. R. Learning outcome achievement in non-traditional (virtual and remote) versus traditional (hands-on) laboratories: A review of the empirical research. Computers & Education, 2015, 87: 218–237. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.003. [6] Wörner, S., Kuhn, J., and Scheiter, K. The best of two worlds: A systematic review on combining real and virtual experiments in science education. Review of Educational Research, 2022, 92(6): 911–952. DOI: 10.3102/00346543221079417. [7] Antonelli, D., Christopoulos, A., Laakso, M.-J., et al. A virtual reality laboratory for blended learning education: Design, implementation and evaluation. Education Sciences, 2023, 13(5): 528. DOI: 10.3390/educsci13050528. [8] Nicol, D. J., and Macfarlane-Dick, D. Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 2006, 31(2): 199–218. DOI: 10.1080/03075070600572090. [9] Haraguchi, D. Development and educational implementation of a project-based learning program for practicing fundamentals of robot system integration process. Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan, 2024, 42(3): 211–214. DOI: 10.7210/jrsj.42.211. [10] Ishitsuka, K., Takahashi, T., Yasunaka, T., and Takezawa, S. Implementation of “Robot SIer” education, including machine IoT, through academia-industry collaboration between local businesses and the National Institute of Technology. Journal of JSEE, 2024, 72(2): 2_7–2_11. DOI: 10.4307/jsee.72.2_7. [11] Li, J., and Liang, W. Effectiveness of virtual laboratory in engineering education: A meta-analysis. PLOS ONE, 2024, 19(12): e0316269. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0316269. [12] Deriba, F. G., Saqr, M., and Tukiainen, M. Assessment of accessibility in virtual laboratories: A systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 2024, 9: 1351711. DOI: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1351711.