An industrial security system for human-robot coexistence

Purpose-The installation of industrial robots requires security barriers, a costly, time consuming exercise. Collaborative robots may offer a solution, however these systems only comply with safety standards if operating at reduced speeds. This paper describes the development and implementation of a novel security system that allows human robot coexistence while permitting the robot to execute much of its task at nominal speed. Design/methodology/approach-The security system is defined by three modes: a nominal mode, a coexistence mode and a gravity compensation mode. Mode transition is triggered by three lasers, two of which are mechanically linked to the robot. These scanners create a dynamic envelope around the robot and allow the detection of operator presence or environmental changes. To avoid velocity discontinuities between transitions we propose a novel time scaling method. Findings-The paper describes the system's mechanical, software and control architecture. The system is demonstrated experimentally on a collaborative robot and is compared with the performance of a state of art security system. Both a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the new system is carried out. Pratical Implications-The mode transition method is easily implemented, requires little computing power and leaves the trajectories unchanged. As velocity discontinuities are avoided, motor wear is reduced. The execution time is substantially less than a commercial alternative. These advantages can lead to economic benefits in high volume manufacturing environments. Originality/value-This paper proposes a novel system that is based on industrial material but that can generate dynamic safety zones for a collaborative robot.

[1]  Paolo Rocco,et al.  Kinetostatic danger field - a novel safety assessment for human-robot interaction , 2010, 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[2]  Wisama Khalil,et al.  Modeling, Identification and Control of Robots , 2003 .

[3]  Alin Albu-Schäffer,et al.  The KUKA-DLR Lightweight Robot arm - a new reference platform for robotics research and manufacturing , 2010, ISR/ROBOTIK.

[4]  André Crosnier,et al.  Collaborative manufacturing with physical human–robot interaction , 2016 .

[5]  Martin Hägele,et al.  Robot Assistants at Manual Workplaces: Effective Co-operation and Safety Aspects , 2002 .

[6]  Koji Ikuta,et al.  Safety Evaluation Method of Design and Control for Human-Care Robots , 2003, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[7]  Lihui Wang,et al.  Active collision avoidance for human–robot collaboration driven by vision sensors , 2017, Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf..

[8]  Frank Hearl,et al.  Working safely with robot workers: Recommendations for the new workplace , 2016, Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene.

[9]  Dana Kulic,et al.  Pre-collision safety strategies for human-robot interaction , 2007, Auton. Robots.

[10]  Lihui Wang,et al.  Depth camera based collision avoidance via active robot control , 2014 .

[11]  Alexander Zelinsky,et al.  Quantitative Safety Guarantees for Physical Human-Robot Interaction , 2003, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[12]  Andrea Maria Zanchettin,et al.  Integration of perception, control and injury knowledge for safe human-robot interaction , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[13]  Przemyslaw A. Lasota,et al.  Toward safe close-proximity human-robot interaction with standard industrial robots , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE).

[14]  Mahdi Tavakoli,et al.  A grasp-based passivity signature for haptics-enabled human-robot interaction: Application to design of a new safety mechanism for robotic rehabilitation , 2017, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[15]  Neville Hogan,et al.  Impedance Control: An Approach to Manipulation: Part II—Implementation , 1985 .

[16]  Dana Kulic,et al.  Real-time safety for human - robot interaction , 2005, ICAR '05. Proceedings., 12th International Conference on Advanced Robotics, 2005..

[17]  Alin Albu-Schäffer,et al.  The “DLR crash report”: Towards a standard crash-testing protocol for robot safety - Part II: Discussions , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[18]  Andrea Maria Zanchettin,et al.  Safety in human-robot collaborative manufacturing environments: Metrics and control , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering.

[19]  Bernard C. Jiang,et al.  A cause-and-effect analysis of robot accidents , 1987 .

[20]  Masayoshi Tomizuka,et al.  Ensuring safety in human-robot coexistence environment , 2014, 2014 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[21]  M. Hagele,et al.  rob@work: Robot assistant in industrial environments , 2002, Proceedings. 11th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[22]  Aude Billard,et al.  Safety issues in human-robot interactions , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[23]  Guanglong Du,et al.  Ensuring safety in human-robot coexisting environment based on two-level protection , 2016, Ind. Robot.

[24]  J. Salisbury,et al.  Active stiffness control of a manipulator in cartesian coordinates , 1980, 1980 19th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control including the Symposium on Adaptive Processes.

[25]  Paolo Rocco,et al.  Towards safe human-robot interaction in robotic cells: An approach based on visual tracking and intention estimation , 2011, 2011 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[26]  Reid G. Simmons,et al.  Sensor fusion for human safety in industrial workcells , 2012, 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.