Requirements for Safe Robots: Measurements, Analysis and New Insights

Physical human—robot interaction and cooperation has become a topic of increasing importance and of major focus in robotics research. An essential requirement of a robot designed for high mobility and direct interaction with human users or uncertain environments is that it must in no case pose a threat to the human. Until recently, quite a few attempts were made to investigate real-world threats via collision tests and use the outcome to considerably improve safety during physical human—robot interaction. In this paper, we give an overview of our systematic evaluation of safety in human—robot interaction, covering various aspects of the most significant injury mechanisms. In order to quantify the potential injury risk emanating from such a manipulator, impact tests with the DLR-Lightweight Robot III were carried out using standard automobile crash test facilities at the German Automobile Club (ADAC). Based on these tests, several industrial robots of different weight have been evaluated and the influence of the robot mass and velocity have been investigated. The evaluated non-constrained impacts would only partially capture the nature of human—robot safety. A possibly constrained environment and its effect on the resulting human injuries are discussed and evaluated from different perspectives. As well as such impact tests and simulations, we have analyzed the problem of the quasi-static constrained impact, which could pose a serious threat to the human even for low-inertia robots under certain circumstances. Finally, possible injuries relevant in robotics are summarized and systematically classified.

[1]  Isaac Asimov,et al.  The Caves of Steel , 1954 .

[2]  J. Versace A Review of the Severity Index , 1971 .

[3]  D. C. Schneider,et al.  Impact Studies of Facial Bones and Skull , 1972 .

[4]  James H. McElhaney,et al.  Biomechanical Aspects of Head Injury , 1973 .

[5]  B. F. Chatterjee,et al.  Abbreviated Injury Scale , 1983 .

[6]  John M. Cavanaugh,et al.  Facial impact tolerance and response , 1986 .

[7]  Alan M. Nahum,et al.  Facial impact response: a comparison of the Hybrid III dummy and human cadaver , 1988 .

[8]  C. Y. Warner,et al.  Force/deflection and fracture characteristics of the temporo-parietal region of the human head , 1991 .

[9]  Mj Kuiken,et al.  38TH ANNUAL PROCEEDINGS - ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF AUTOMOTIVE MEDICINE , 1994 .

[10]  Yasuyuki Yamada,et al.  Fail-safe human/robot contact in the safety space , 1996, Proceedings 5th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Communication. RO-MAN'96 TSUKUBA.

[11]  Shigeki Sugano,et al.  Development of human symbiotic robot: WENDY , 1999, Proceedings 1999 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.99CH36288C).

[12]  P. F. Gloyns,et al.  EUROPEAN NEW CAR ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME (EuroNCAP) ASSESSMENT PROTOCOL AND BIOMECHANICAL LIMITS , 1999 .

[13]  Kazuo Tanie,et al.  Human Safety Mechanisms of Human-Friendly Robots: Passive Viscoelastic Trunk and Passively Movable Base , 2000, Int. J. Robotics Res..

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

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

[16]  Markus Schedl,et al.  Torque-Controlled Lightweight Arms and Articulated Hands: Do We Reach Technological Limits Now? , 2004, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[17]  Michael R. Zinn,et al.  A New Actuation Approach for Human Friendly Robot Design , 2004, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[18]  Antonio Bicchi,et al.  Fast and "soft-arm" tactics [robot arm design] , 2004, IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine.

[19]  Alin Albu-Schäffer,et al.  A Unified Passivity-based Control Framework for Position, Torque and Impedance Control of Flexible Joint Robots , 2007, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[20]  Bram Vanderborght,et al.  Exploiting Natural Dynamics to Reduce Energy Consumption by Controlling the Compliance of Soft Actuators , 2006, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[21]  Alessandro De Luca,et al.  Collision Detection and Safe Reaction with the DLR-III Lightweight Manipulator Arm , 2006, 2006 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[22]  Alin Albu-Schäffer,et al.  The DLR lightweight robot: design and control concepts for robots in human environments , 2007, Ind. Robot.

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

[24]  G. Hirzinger,et al.  Approaching Asimov's 1st Law , 2007 .

[25]  A Unified Passivity-based Control Framework for Position, Torque and Impedance Control of Flexible Joint Robots , 2007 .

[26]  U. Frese,et al.  Foul 2050: thoughts on physical interaction in human-robot soccer , 2007, 2007 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[27]  Rolf Dieter Schraft,et al.  Robot-Dummy Crash Tests for Robot Safety Assessment , 2007, Proceedings 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[28]  Takayuki Kanda,et al.  HRI caught on film , 2007, 2007 2nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[29]  Alin Albu-Schäffer,et al.  Safety Evaluation of Physical Human-Robot Interaction via Crash-Testing , 2007, Robotics: Science and Systems.

[30]  G. Hirzinger,et al.  A new variable stiffness design: Matching requirements of the next robot generation , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[31]  Alessandro De Luca,et al.  Collision detection and reaction: A contribution to safe physical Human-Robot Interaction , 2008, 2008 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[32]  A. Bicchi,et al.  Physical human-robot interaction: Dependability, safety, and performance , 2008, 2008 10th IEEE International Workshop on Advanced Motion Control.

[33]  Alin Albu-Schaffer,et al.  Kick it like a Safe Robot: Requirements for 2050 , 2008 .

[34]  G. Hirzinger,et al.  The role of the robot mass and velocity in physical human-robot interaction - Part II: Constrained blunt impacts , 2008, IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[35]  Alin Albu-Schäffer,et al.  The role of the robot mass and velocity in physical human-robot interaction - Part I: Non-constrained blunt impacts , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[36]  Oussama Khatib,et al.  A hybrid actuation approach for human-friendly robot design , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.