Vous êtes confronté à des points de vue contradictoires sur les protocoles de sécurité en robotique. Comment vous assurez-vous que tout le monde reste protégé ?

Safety should start right from the earliest stages of a robotics project or product development. I often encourage a mix of TDD and BDD in the development process, where clearly defined safety criteria have been put in place along each development iteration.

Robots are working with signals. According to the sensor signals or programmed signals. One sensor malfunctioning or one signal delay can change the robot as an uncontrolled robot. So safety measures should be having the first priority. The operator of the robot should be a well experienced operator and he should be in a training period to identify the robot functioning well. In our battle bot we've used Master Kill Switch for safety. Once the robot started malfunctioning for some reason, we could be able to stop it using the switch immediately.

Preventive Measure and Fault tolerance control mechanism with sensors as well as sensor-less estimator based systems ensure the stability and safety of entire robotics dynamics.

It’s very important to understand the surroundings and the fault that is encountered. Making sure of safety of people and other equipments around it before hitting e stop. Jogging at a very slow speed and right orientation can be a handy way to recover from situations such as misgrip and improper load of a part.

When it comes to robotics, safety isn't just a protocol—it's a commitment. Drawing from years of experience, I've learned that proactive safety measures aren't optional; they're foundational. Implementing safety-first strategies means anticipating potential hazards before they escalate. This involves thorough testing, regular equipment maintenance, and fostering a culture where safety concerns are addressed openly and immediately. By putting safety at the forefront, we protect our team and ensure the longevity of our projects.

In robotics, ensuring safety is paramount. The first step in setting safety protocols is to understand the project's scope. Define the robot’s intended tasks, the environment it will operate in, and any interactions it will have (with humans or objects). This scope will guide the identification of potential hazards and the development of relevant safety measures. Then identify the hazards, perform a systematic analysis of all components and their interactions. Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) is a useful technique for identifying points of failure and their potential impacts. A systematic approach should resolve any disagreements on safety protocols.

In my experience, effective risk assessment is all about understanding the nuances of the project. It's not just identifying what could go wrong; it's about predicting the cascading effects of those risks. I've seen how overlooking even minor risks can lead to significant disruptions. That’s why I advocate for a detailed, scenario-based approach, where we assess the impact, likelihood, and mitigation strategies. This approach ensures that we are prepared for both the expected and the unexpected, keeping everyone safe.

To enhance the effectiveness of risk assessments, consider incorporating dynamic risk assessments that evolve as new data is gathered. This approach allows for real-time adjustments to safety protocols based on actual performance and near-miss incidents. Additionally, involving a multidisciplinary team in the risk assessment process—combining insights from robotics engineers, safety experts, and end-users—ensures a comprehensive understanding of potential hazards and fosters buy-in from all stakeholders. This collaborative method helps bridge gaps between differing opinions and creates more robust, adaptable safety measures.

Before resolving disagreements on safety protocols, it's crucial to conduct a thorough risk assessment. Identify potential hazards in the robotic systems and evaluate the likelihood and severity of these risks. With a clear understanding, you can develop safety measures that are proportionate and evidence-based, ensuring protocols are grounded in fact rather than opinion.

La norme ISO 10218-1 doit toujours etre le juge de paix. Elle comprend quatre principes majeurs de mise en sécurité, combinables entre eux en fonction des situations : La possibilité d’un arrêt contrôlé de sécurité du robot (arrêt contrôlé nominal) Le guidage manuel, c’est-à-dire, la possibilité de contrôler le robot à distance et en toute sécurité par un opérateur, à l’aide d’un dispositif d’activation et de commande en vitesse réduite, sûre à déterminer, via l’analyse de risque. Le contrôle de la vitesse et de la distance de séparation, qui consiste à pouvoir maintenir une distance de séparation suffisante entre l'opérateur et le système robot La limitation de la puissance et de la force du robot par conception ou par commande.

Finding common ground among conflicting views is key to creating effective safety protocols in robotics. Gather input from all stakeholders—engineers, technicians, and end-users—and identify the non-negotiable safety aspects everyone agrees on. Use these shared concerns as the foundation for your protocols, building a consensus that respects all perspectives while upholding the highest safety standards.

Safety debates often stem from different perspectives, each with its own merit. The key to resolving these conflicts is finding common ground. I've facilitated many discussions where diverse viewpoints were reconciled by focusing on shared goals—namely, the well-being of our team and the success of the project. By encouraging open dialogue and listening to each side, we can align on safety protocols that everyone can agree on, ensuring protection without compromising progress.

I found it useful to keep the testing protocol in an internal site, which any person of interest can access, and suggest additions or changes. About half of these safety manuals are not my own words. I keep the last word on the editions, and even so, there is power in a collaborative document with attribution of authorship for each section.

From an engineer perspective it is always important to understand the safety concerns of the end users, maintenance technicians, and other facility staff that will need to interact with the robotic application. Understanding these concerns can help safety protocols and checks to be implemented from the beginning of the design phase to prevent injury, as well as help the end user facility in defining their safety standards enforced employees dealing with robotic applications.

Common Ground: Finding shared values, interests, and goals to: - Build strong relationships - Foster collaboration - Enhance communication - Resolve conflicts - Drive collective success Seek commonalities, listen actively, and adapt to stand together and achieve more!

When dealing with conflicting views on safety in robotics, the best way forward is to use trusted standards like ISO or ANSI as a solid reference. This gives everyone a common ground to work from. It’s important to hear out each person’s concerns and focus on real risks through assessments. By considering how people actually interact with the machines, you make sure safety isn’t just theoretical but practical. At the end of the day, creating a culture where safety always comes first ensures everyone’s on the same page and protected.

Nationally or internationally established standards are only the basis of a safety procedure. It is necessary to delve much deeper into the subject to adapt equipment to all the risks involved. However, there are many new technologies that assist in the analysis of safety procedures, as well as new equipment that expands its scope and regulatory coverage.

Navigating safety standards can be really complicated, but aligning with established standards like ISO and ANSI ensures that we are not only meeting, but exceeding safety expectations. These standards provide a solid foundation for bridging the gap between conflicting ideas, ensuring that safety is not compromised while pushing the boundaries of innovation.

Adherence to Safety Standards Industry Best Practices: Ensure that all robotics operations adhere to relevant industry standards and regulations. Regular Audits: Conduct regular audits to verify compliance and identify areas for improvement.

Le sourcing est important et avoir dans son écosystème des organismes de sécurités aident énormément à faire les choix les plus adaptés aux situations rencontrés .

I would highlight common ground, continuous learning and risks here. Sometimes people buy a robot and then try to figure out what to do with it. Kind of similar to chopping veg with a knife for the first time. Safety is kind of learned ad hoc in those cases from the end user/buyer point of view. They might ask, "Do we really need a fence? What about a weld curtain?" Bad programming of the robot can also lead to problems. Digitalization can help. Safety planning and integration of robots can also be simulated offline with tools like Visual Components and KUKA.Sim software. Our relationship with robots can be complicated: a mix of avoidance and collaboration. Safety and healthy boundaries should take precedence.

In the rapidly evolving world of robotics, continuous learning is not just an option but a necessity. By fostering a culture of ongoing education and open communication, we can stay ahead of emerging threats and improve our security protocols to protect both innovation and human well-being.

As I said before, the team can suggest any change to a document, and have it attributed. Not only to test protocols, but to any document. We called it «the suggestion box». Some of the best ideas I have got to implement came from absolutely brilliant people that did not hold an engineering degree, but that have the experience of years of labour and the intelligence of self-made men. That being said, not all ideas that come from non-developers are good, and only some are acceptable. One must exercise critical thinking and see if they fit the purpose and further the development of the machines that are being developed.

Continuous Learning and Improvement Stay Updated: Keep up-to-date with the latest safety technologies and practices. Feedback Loops: Implement feedback mechanisms to gather insights and make necessary adjustments.

10-20% may be a bit exaggerated for a safety budget, even of physical and kinetic machines, but, even in the 6-8% range, the budget always corresponds to a loss of resources and time. I agree with you -- it must be optimised. Thinking security, as you said, since the very early stages of conception, can save money and time, not only on the safety budget itself, but on the machine itself. A safe machine isn't necessarily more expensive or more difficult to develop, and a serious accident will normally be more expensive, demoralising and slower to solve than making sure the risks do not exist at all or are, at the very least, mitigated.

Using Microsoft Active Directory to restrict access to certain applications or searches on the internet was always a great safety for my students as I worked as an Engage Educator for Franklin Discovery Academy. I did not configure any of these during my employment there, but I did recognize the tools that were used for this as I acquired my Networking Certification through BYU Idaho (during my Bachelors in Applied Technology studies).

This is where simulation really comes in handy. Combining simulation with other new technologies such as augmented reality in the design process of a robotic application, be it a stationary machine, AGV, or robot on a track, simulation can help find areas of potential safety concern without the potential of causing damage to the machine components or the robot itself, and protect operators and maintenance techs from injuries in the future.

Leveraging Technology for Safety Safety Features: Utilize advanced technologies such as sensors, AI, and robotics safety systems to enhance safety. Training and Education: Provide adequate training on the use of safety technologies to ensure their effective implementation.