English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The current technical specification ISO/TS15066:2016(E) for safe human-robotinteraction contains logically conflicting definitions for the contact betweenhuman and robot. This may result in different interpretations for the contactclassification and thus no unique outcome can be expected, which may even causea risk to the human. In previous work, we showed a first set of implications.This paper addresses the possible interpretations of a collision scenario as aresult of the varying interpretations for a risk assessment. With an experimentincluding four commercially available robot systems we demonstrate theprocedure of the risk assessment following the different interpretations of theTS. The results indicate possible incorrect use of the technical specification,which we believe needs to be resolved in future revisions. For this, we suggesttools in form of a decision tree and constrained collision force maps, whichenable a simple, unambiguous risk assessment for HRI.

ISO/TS 15066: How Different Interpretations Affect Risk Assessment