Virtual reality in manufacturing education shows promise, but cost and access hold it back

In studies where VR simulations mimicked real-world operations, learners demonstrated improved accuracy, knowledge retention, and safety protocol adherence. Simulations also provided safer environments for high-risk operations, such as forklift training and steel casting, and eliminated material waste by using virtual consumables.

A comprehensive review from Purdue University reveals that despite rapid advancements in virtual reality (VR) and its growing potential in workforce training, its integration in U.S. manufacturing education remains limited, hindered by cost, accessibility, and fragmented implementation.

Based on a scoping review of 108 peer-reviewed studies, a preprint of this study titled "Virtual Reality in Manufacturing Education: A Scoping Review Indicating State-of-the-Art, Benefits, and Challenges Across Domains, Levels, and Entities" is submitted to Elsevier and also available on arXiv.

The study, led by a collaborative team of engineers, computer scientists, and education researchers, mapped the use of immersive VR in manufacturing education across traditional and advanced domains, formal education systems, and workplace training. While the technology offers enhanced skill-building, reduced risk exposure, and scalable learning environments, the review identifies a sharp mismatch between potential and adoption, especially among under-resourced institutions and small- to medium-sized enterprises.

Researchers classified VR usage into conventional domains such as machining, welding, and assembly, and modern ones including additive manufacturing, robotics, smart manufacturing, and green technologies. VR has proven particularly effective in training psychomotor skills in welding and machining, where hands-on learning is essential. In studies where VR simulations mimicked real-world operations, learners demonstrated improved accuracy, knowledge retention, and safety protocol adherence. Simulations also provided safer environments for high-risk operations, such as forklift training and steel casting, and eliminated material waste by using virtual consumables.

Despite these documented advantages, VR adoption remains uneven. The study found that high implementation costs, limited access to equipment, and technical barriers are obstructing widespread use. Classroom and laboratory settings dominate most of the implementation, with industry adoption lagging due to concerns over interoperability, intellectual property, and proprietary content. While more than 77 studies involved system development, only 30 reported real-world implementation, and just one took place within a live industrial environment.

The study also draws attention to gaps in content creation. Most VR applications rely on development teams with advanced programming skills, excluding subject matter experts from directly contributing to instructional content. This disconnect weakens pedagogical effectiveness and slows down iteration. Researchers emphasized the need for scalable, low-code authoring platforms that enable manufacturing educators to design their own training modules, pointing to emerging solutions such as programming by demonstration and AI-driven content generation.

In terms of learner outcomes, the review cites evidence that VR training enhances cognitive and technical skills, improves motivation, and reduces training costs when compared to traditional methods. Applications in additive manufacturing, for example, allow students to simulate complex print jobs without needing access to costly industrial equipment. Similarly, immersive training for energy systems, sustainability practices, and robotics provide hands-on experience that would otherwise be inaccessible in most high schools and trade programs.

However, many of these benefits are tempered by challenges around scalability, equity, and long-term skill retention. Studies focusing on short-term outcomes dominate the literature, with limited data on how VR-trained skills translate into real-world job performance over time. Instructors also report a lack of standardized tools for assessment, difficulties in aligning VR experiences with curriculum goals, and limitations in hardware comfort, especially for prolonged use.

Privacy and data ethics emerged as additional concerns. Many immersive systems track sensitive user data such as eye movements, body posture, and facial expressions. The study recommends that institutions developing or deploying VR applications adopt clear consent protocols and prioritize student data protection. It also urges the development of standard frameworks to support modular content updates, improve cross-platform compatibility, and ensure ethical integration of user tracking technologies.

On a broader policy level, the report criticizes the fragmented nature of support between academia and industry. While industries are increasingly building their own in-house VR training to bypass skill shortages, this trend sidelines academic institutions from keeping pace with evolving manufacturing demands. The authors call for structured partnerships between universities, vocational schools, and manufacturing firms to align VR-based curricula with real-world industrial needs. They also propose the creation of national VR content repositories to promote shared access to simulations, interfaces, and domain-specific tools, similar to existing CAD model databases.

In K–12 education, where early exposure to STEM and manufacturing is crucial, VR remains underutilized. A handful of studies have explored teaching renewable energy and smart manufacturing through virtual field trips and interactive labs. However, the high cost of headsets, lack of training for educators, and health concerns have made it difficult to scale VR for younger students. The study calls for low-cost, passive immersive solutions and greater funding for curriculum-aligned VR tools that can be used in underserved districts.

In contrast, higher education institutions are at the forefront of VR experimentation. Most VR training systems and modules, particularly those involving additive manufacturing, assembly, and robotics, are developed and tested in university labs. Yet, the absence of consistent IT support, rapid hardware obsolescence, and insufficient learning management system integration continue to limit institutionalization.

The review concludes that VR in manufacturing education is a promising but underutilized tool. Its effectiveness in simulating hazardous tasks, enabling remote training, and enhancing learner engagement is well documented. But unless barriers to cost, content, and collaboration are addressed, it will remain confined to experimental silos rather than becoming a transformative solution to the manufacturing workforce gap.

The authors recommend coordinated investments in adaptive learning systems, open-source content repositories, and collaborative design frameworks to make immersive learning not only scalable, but sustainable. Without such action, the U.S. risks falling further behind global leaders in industrial training and smart manufacturing readiness.