AUTOMATION & ROBOTICS
Cobots are known for their ability to share the same workspace as human employees and are now a mainstay of the industrial robotics sector.
CE/UKCA marking.
Integrators and end users are required to complete a detailed risk assessment to identify the risks that both the robot and the application present. Where integrators and end users are not familiar with the risk assessment process, support from independent safety specialists should be sought. It is important that integrators and end users move away from the ‘cobot’ analogy and start to think of cobots as robots for collaborative applications. By generating an audit trail via a fully traceable risk assessment, manufacturers will be able to demonstrate to the HSE that they fully understand the risks involved with cobot integration, have measures in place to control them and are therefore compliant with the new standard.
IDENTIFYING POTENTIAL HAZARDS The risk assessment should cover a number of stages in regard to identifying hazards, to enable integrators and end users to achieve their ultimate goal of UKCA/CE Marking. These may include, but are not limited to: • Validation and verification: Using calibrated force sensors to measure the collision forces in the event of a collision with the cobot and documenting the results.
• Guarding: Determining if physical or virtual guarding is required, or if risk can be mitigated through power and force limitation, or whether a combination of risk reduction measures is required.
• Permissible force values: Using the body model and the risk assessment to identify the areas of the body which could be struck in the event of a collision. This will then be validated.
USING TECHNOLOGY
Whilst removing hazards or risk can be done in various ways, technology is also playing its part more and more in collaborative applications. The use of a cobot’s internal force and pressure monitoring is one option, but other easy-to-validate solutions exist and can be used, not only with cobots, but also industrial robots. The FANUC Dual Check Safety (DCS) software function that monitors a robot’s speed and position is a good example of technology that enables safer operation and reduces risk in system design. The use of external sensors is affording system designers a new method when human/robot collaboration is needed. “Making higher payload collaborative and software solutions that can be validated and ensure risk-free operation. We have successfully implemented these types of solutions with robots with over one tonne payload. It’s the technology that makes this possible,” says Oliver Selby, head of sales at FANUC UK.
PROMOTING BEST PRACTICE
As with any area of machine safety, it is always best to seek advice from your cobot supplier or an independent safety consultant if you are in any doubt as to your cobot or application’s compliance with the proposed new safety standard. This is relevant not just from a CE/ UKCA Marking point of view, but also because the end user or cobot system integrator has a legal responsibility to show compliance to PUWER (Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations). If your cobot or associated processes do not meet the new safety standard, then you will not be PUWER-compliant, either.
The most recent IFR statistics show that cobot installations worldwide grew by 31 percent year-on- year in 2022 to 54,868 units.
While cobots may continue to be seen as the ‘friendly face’ of robotics, increasing in popularity across a variety of manufacturing sectors, it is important to remember that they are still industrial robots. The upcoming alignment of the cobot safety technical integrators are advised to take their safety responsibilities seriously.
For more information and advice on cobot and robot safety, go to https://www.
cobotsmachinerysafety.co.uk
Fanuc
www.fanuc.eu/eu-en FACTORY&HANDLINGSOLUTIONS | FEBRUARY 2025 17
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58
