Paradigms and Safety Requirements for a New Generation of Workplace Equipment

• Autorzy: Missala T.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

A workplace in the manufacturing industry consists of not only stationary equipment (e.g., machining centres, fixed robots) but also mobile equipment (e.g., automated guided vehicles, mobile robots), with both kinds cooperating directly with workers. Workplace equipment should not only be safe, it should also not generate fear or anxiety; still better if it should inspire calm and confidence. In view of robot laws, this article presents selected examples of robot–human co-operation, reviews safety requirements and safety functions developed to date. It also proposes a package of selected new safety functions, necessary to fulfil this paradigm. It also suggests and presents examples of actions that can make the workplace a human-friendly environment and presents examples of such actions.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

safety requirements workplace; industrial robots; mobile robots

PL

miejsce pracy; bezpieczeństwo; roboty przemysłowe; roboty mobilne

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 2014
• Tom: Vol. 20, No. 2
• Strony: 249--256
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 31 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Missala T.

• Industrial Institute for Automation and Measurements PIAP, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1.McDermott TJ. Responsibility & integrity a must in manufacturing. DesignNews. 2012. Retrieved February 11, 2014, from: http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1365&doc_id=237257.
• 2.Missala T. Safety of robots in a neighborhood of the people and the new law of robotics. Pomiary Automatyka Robotyka PAR. 2012;(1):48–52. Retrieved February 11, 2014, from: https://www.par.pl/2012/PAR_01_2012_Missala_48_53.pdf.
• 3.International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). Functional safety—safety instrumented systems for the process industry sector—part 3: guidance for the determination of the required safety integrity levels (Standard No. IEC 61511-3:2004). Geneva, Switzerland: IEC; 2004.
• 4.International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). Functional safety of electrical/electronic/programmable electronic safety related systems—part 5: examples of methods for the determination of safety integrity levels (Standard No. IEC 61508-5:2010). Geneva, Switzerland: IEC; 2010.
• 5.Missala T. Analiza wymagań i metod postępowania przy ocenie ryzyka i określaniu wymaganego poziomu nienaruszalności bezpieczeństwa [An analysis of the requirements and methods of proceeding in assessing risk and determining the required level of of safety integrity]. Warszawa, Poland: Oficyna Wydawnicza Przemysłowego Instytutu Automatyki i Pomiarów; 2009.
• 6.International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). Functional safety of electrical/ electronic/programmable electronic safety related systems—part 1: general requirements (Standard No. IEC 61508-1:2010). Geneva, Switzerland: IEC; 2010.
• 7.International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). Functional safety of electrical/electronic/programmable electronic safety related systems—part 4: definitions and abbreviations (Standard No. IEC 61508-4:2010). Geneva, Switzerland: IEC; 2010.
• 8.Karwowski W, Rahimi M, Mihaly T. Effects of computerized automation and robotics on safety performance of a manufacturing plant. Journal of Occupational Accidents. 1988;10(3):217–33.
• 9.Rahimi M, Karwowski W. A research paradigm in human-robot interaction. Int J Ind Ergon. 1990;5(1):59–71.
• 10.Karwowski W. Rahimi M. Worker selection of safe speed and idle condition in simulated monitoring of two industrial robots. Ergonomics. 1991;34(5):531–46.
• 11.Karwowski W, Rahimi M, Parsaei H, Amarnath BR, Pongpatanasuegsa N. The effect of simulated accident on worker safety behavior around industrial robots. Int J Ind Ergon. 1991;7(3):229–39.
• 12.Zurada J, Karwowski W, Graham JH. Sensory integration and management of uncertainty in robot safety systems: a review. International Journal of Computer-Integrated Manufacturing. 1998;11(3):262–73.
• 13.Kosiński RA, Grabowski A, Siemiątkowska B. Dwukamerowy, neuronowy system bezpieczeństwa do wykrywania sytuacji niebezpiecznych na zautomatyzowanych stanowiskach pracy [Two cameras neural safety system for the advanced recognition of danger situations on automated works stands]. In: Materials of Conference AUTOMATION. Warszawa, Poland: PIAP; 2006. p. 119–27.
• 14.Missala T. Bezpieczeństwo robotów przemysłowych. Aspekty systemowe [Safety of industrial robots. System aspects]. Prace Naukowe Instytutu Cybernetyki Technicznej Politechniki Wrocławskiej. Konferencje. 1993;(41):374–80.
• 15.Missala T. Ocena ryzyka w gnieździe zrobotyzowanym—propozycja postępowania [Safety assessment for a robotized plant—proposal of proceeding]. Prace Naukowe Instytutu Cybernetyki Technicznej Politechniki Wrocławskiej. Konferencje. 2001;(46):345–52.
• 16.Missala T. Robot jako system związany z bezpieczeństwem [Robot as a safety-related system]. In: Tchoń K, editor. Postępy robotyki: przemysłowe i medyczne systemy robotyczne [Progress in robotics: industrial and medical robotic systems]. Warszawa, Poland: Wydawnictwa Komunikacji i Łączności; 2005. p. 183–91.
• 17.Missala T. Nienaruszalność bezpieczeństwa przegubowych konstrukcji robotów [Safety integrity of turn-wrist robot construction]. In: Tchoń K, editor. Postępy robotyki: systemy i współdziałanie robotów [Progress in robotics: systems and co-operation of robots]. Warszawa, Poland: Wydawnictwa Komunikacji i Łączności; 2006. p. 139–48.
• 18.Missala T. Nienaruszalność bezpieczeństwa robotów kroczących—analiza wstępna [Safety integrity of walking robots—preliminary analysis]. In: Thoń K, Zieliński C, editors. Problemy robotyki [Problems of robotics]. Politechnika Warszawska—Prace Naukowe—Elektronika (No. 166). Warszawa Poland: Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Warszawskiej; 2008. p. 597–606.
• 19.Missala T. Bezpieczeństwo funkcjonalne zintegrowanego systemu wytwarzania [Functional safety of integrated manufacturing system]. In: Thoń K, Zieliński C, editors. Problemy robotyki [Problems of robotics]. Politechnika Warszawska—Prace Naukowe—Elektronika (No. 175). Warszawa Poland: Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Warszawskiej; 2010. p. 275–84.
• 20.International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Robots and robotic devices—safety requirements for industrial robots—part 1: robots (Standard No. ISO 10218-1:2011). Geneva, Switzerland: ISO; 2011.
• 21.International Organization for Standardization (ISO). Robots and robotic devices—safety requirements for industrial robots—part 2: robot systems and integration (Standard No. ISO 10218-2:2011). Geneva, Switzerland: ISO; 2011.
• 22.Murray C. Slideshow: humanoid robots get real. DesignNews. 2011. Retrieved February 11, 2014, from: http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=233766.
• 23.Montalbano E. NASA explores humanoid robot design. DesignNews. 2012. Retrieved February 11, 2014, from: http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=243445.
• 24.Happich J. ST-Ericsson launches a lowcost and compact Android-ready platform. EE Times. 2010. Retrieved February 11, 2014, from: ttp://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1270515.
• 25.Clarke P. Accelerated Android 4.0 available on ARM development boards. EE Times. 2011. Retrieved February 11, 2014, from: http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1260844.
• 26.Johansson D. Android platforms—four tips for UI development. EE Times. 2008. Retrieved February 11, 2014, from: http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1275158.
• 27.Beciri D. Cyberdyne HAL-5—exoskeleton robot. RobAid beta. 2009. Retrieved February 11, 2014, from: http://www.robaid.com/bionics/cyberdyne-hal-5-exoskeleton-robot.htm.
• 28.Neural recordings: robot reveals the inner workings of brain cells. 2012. Retrieved February 11, 2014, from: http://www.gtresearchnews.gatech.edu/robot-brainrecording/.
• 29.Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices. OJ. 1993;L169:1–43. Retrieved February 11, 2014, from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG:1993L0042:20071011:en:PDF.
• 30.Forge S, Blackman C. A helping hand for Europe: the competitive outlook for the EU robotics industry. Seville, Spain: European Commission, Joint Research Centre; 2009. Retrieved February 11, 2014, from: http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC61539.pdf.
• 31.Murray C. GM’s Robo-glove mimics human hand. DesignNews. 2012. Retrieved February 11, 2014, from: http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=240915.