DAGSTUHL SEMINAR ON COMPUTER-ASSISTED ENGINEERING...

DAGSTUHL SEMINAR ON "COMPUTER-ASSISTED ENGINEERING FOR ROBOTICS AND AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS", FEB. 13 – 17, 2017

Human-Robot CollaborationIndustrial Applications and Open Challenges

Björn Matthias, ABB Corporate Research Fellow, Robotic Automation

This presentation includes forward-looking information and statements including statements concerning the outlook for our businesses. These statements arebased on current expectations, estimates and projections about the factors that may affect our future performance, including global economic conditions, andthe economic conditions of the regions and industries that are major markets for ABB Ltd. These expectations, estimates and projections are generallyidentifiable by statements containing words such as “expects,” “believes,” “estimates,” “targets,” “plans,” “outlook” or similar expressions.

There are numerous risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond our control, that could cause our actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking information and statements made in this presentation and which could affect our ability to achieve any or all of our stated targets. The importantfactors that could cause such differences include, among others:

– business risks associated with the volatile global economic environment and political conditions– costs associated with compliance activities– market acceptance of new products and services– changes in governmental regulations and currency exchange rates, and– such other factors as may be discussed from time to time in ABB Ltd’s filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, including its Annual

Reports on Form 20-F.

Although ABB Ltd believes that its expectations reflected in any such forward-looking statement are based upon reasonable assumptions, it can give noassurance that those expectations will be achieved.

This presentation contains non-GAAP measures of performance. Definitions of these measures and reconciliations between these measures and their US GAAPcounterparts can be found in the ‘Supplemental reconciliations and definitions’ section of “Financial Information” under “Quarterly results and annual reports”on our website at www.abb.com/investorrelations

Important notices

February 16, 2017 Slide 2

http://www.abb.com/investorrelations

This contribution seeks to identify some important gaps in present methodology in the deployment of industrial robots in applicationsof human-robot collaboration (HRC). The drivers and enablers for deployment of industrial robots and of HRC in industrial practice aresummarized. Safety of machinery, as called out for example in the European Machinery Directive, is introduced as a necessary boundarycondition to fulfill in applications of industrial robots. A brief overview of the relevant standards to be followed is given. The basic typesof collaborative operation of industrial robots are summarized, describing the specific protection schemes for each. The challenges inplanning and commissioning collaborative applications in industrial production are considered in more detail. This allows theidentification of the present lack of methodology and tools to support the economical and safety-rated deployment of applicationsusing HRC. The resulting research questions address these and other issues associated with the future of industrial robots and theirapplications.

Abstract

Human-Robot Collaboration – Industrial Applications + Open Challenges


Introduction

Drivers + enablers for deployment of industrial robots and ofhuman-robot collaboration (HRC) in industrial practice

Safety of machinery

Basic types of collaborative operation of industrial robots

Challenges in planning and commissioning collaborativeapplications in industrial production

Research questions


Outline

When I was a child, my children’s books on science and technology promised mea bright future. One in which, after about the year 2000, no one would have togo to work anymore, machines would do everything, and all people would be onvacation full-time.

• Are we in any sense still moving in this direction, beyond automating “dull,dirty, dangerous” tasks?

• Do we actually want anything of this sort?• What are we working for, both in research and in engineering?

The End of (Industrial) Work?

Introductory Observations

February 16, 2017

ABB: the pioneering technology leader


What(Offering)

For whom(Customers)

Where(Geographies)

Utilities Industry Transport & Infrastructure

~35% of revenue ~40% of revenue ~25% of revenue

Globally

Asia, Middle East, Africa 38% Americas 29% Europe 33%

~$34 bn revenue ~100 countries ~132,000 employees

Pioneering technology

Products 58% Systems 24% Services & software 18%

Committed to sustainability

February 16, 2017 * Terrawatt-hoursSlide 7

430,000m3Reduction inwaterwithdrawals

9%reduction in GHGemissions (Scope1 &2)

700community projects andcharities supported in 2015

490 TWh*energy saved byABB drives

Safety“Don’t look theother way” – 32%improvement toemployee TRIFRsince 2013

Running the world without consuming the earth

EXAMPLE

Economic success, environmental stewardship, social progress

A true global player - team, culture, and presence

Well positioned in attractive markets


Emerging markets (46%)

Mature markets (54%)

>3/4 from outside

Switzerland and Sweden

27 nationalities from 6

continents

7 nationalities in the

Executive Committee

Revenue split 2016 Top 200 managers

ABB has a unique global team with local presence everywhere

Europe

33% $11.3 bn

Americas

29% $9.7 bn

AMEA

$12.8 bn38%

The ABB Robot Family – Suitable for a wide range of applications

ABB Robotics

February 16, 2017

Reach up to 3.5 m

Payload up to 800 kg

Controller versions

http://stage-www.abb.com/global/gad/gad02008.nsf/vwImages/BAB6949C45F8ED5FC1257624005A3C2F/$File/57509-0010B.tif

Incremental Improvements – Same Market?

Introductory Observations

February 16, 2017(source: International Federation of Robotics (IFR), World Robotics 2016 Industrial Robots)

– Things are going very well in established markets– Tempting to simply continue– Growth above all in China– Automotive still dominates numbers and drives industrial robot technology

requirements– Many other markets, e.g. 3C assembly have very low degrees of automation.

Introduction


Safety of machinery



Research questions


Outline

1. Reduced operating costs

2. Improved product quality

3. Improved quality of work for employees

4. Increased production output

5. Increased product manufacturing flexibility

6. Reduced waste

7. Improved health and safety

8. Reduced labor turnover

9. Reduced capital costs

10. Save space

The 10 Reasons to Invest in Robots

Business Drivers + Technology Enablers

February 16, 2017

Reduce “dirty, dull, dangerous” (3D) jobs

Explosion of Product Variants – Automobiles


(data source: Wikipedia pages of automotive OEMs)

Production volume per variant

No

.of

pro

duc

tva

rian

tsLo

Hi

Lo Hi

Har

dau

tom

atio

n

Manual

Robotzone

Societal Trend– Individuality

– Differentiation w.r.t. peers

Resulting Market Trend– Increasing no. of product variants, customization

– Decreasing product lifetime

– From “mass production” towards “masscustomization”

Challenge to Industrial Production– Efficient handling of large range of variants and short

model lifetimes

– Common solution today: Mostly manual productionin Asia

Mass Customization


Production volume per variant

No

.of

pro

duc

tva

rian

tsLo

Hi

Lo Hi

Har

dau

tom

atio

n

Manual

Conventionalrobotapplications

February 16, 2017

Digitalization (Industrie 4.0 / Internet of Things)– Affordable large-scale computing power

– Higher-speed connectivity, 5G networks

– Cloud services

– Data-driven services

Autonomy (Heteronomy?)– Adaptivity / machine learning / AI

– Low-cost sensors / advanced sensors

– Rote, cyclic executionà adaptivity

Human Integration– Ease of use, task-oriented instruction

– Human-robot / -machine collaboration

Other– Open source communities, shared development

– Additive manufacturing

Relevant Technology Trends


February 16, 2017

(pictures:A

BB

,Fanuc,Ford

Mo

torC

om

pany,G

oo

gle

Research

/X

)(so

urceo

fpicto

gram

s:Christo

ph

Ro

seratA

llAb

outLean.co

m)

Safety Technology and Human-Robot Collaboration


February 16, 2017

Conventional industrial robotsà Separate players

Collaborative industrial robotsà Team players

Safety by separationà No collaborationà No moving contact

Safety by supervision functionsà Limited collaborationà Contact under strict precautions

Harmless manipulatorsà Full collaborationà Contact OK

Robot produces according toapplication designà Limited flexibility, high cost

Human and robot share tasks,according to respective strengthsà High flexibility, moderate cost

Scalable / Partial Automation by HRC


(adapted from B. Lotter)

Number ofvariants lowhigh

Lot size highlow

Flex

ibili

ty

low

high

Pro

ductivity

low

high

Automaticassembly

Manual assembly

Collaborativeassembly

February 16, 2017

Robot as lift assist device for heavy loads

– Collaboration type “hand guiding”

– Suitable worker postures

– Human control and authority over machinery

– Work place design

Robot as assembly assistant in mixed human-robotenvironment

– Collaborative type “power and force limiting”

– Robot motion characteristics (acceleration,speed, arm poses, …)

– Human control and authority over machinery

– Work place design

Ergonomics


February 16, 2017

Flexible lifting device Flexible positioner

Flexible fixture Event-triggering

Threats to Established Suppliers of Industrial Robots


February 16, 2017

Present Challenge

Full-featured systems Low-cost

Full-featured systems Application-targeted „lean“ system

Monolithic, proprietary control system Open interfaces, open source

Diversity of interfaces Interoperability of robot controllers, PLCs,drives, etc. with common HMI, commoncontrol system

Proprietary textual programming language Intuitive programming methods, machinelearning, inference from design documents

Proprietary teaching and operating inputdevices, pendants

Open interfaces for choice of input devices,multi-modal input facility

Introduction


Safety of machinery



Research questions


Outline

Safety: Laws, Standards, Certifications, Interdependence for Partly Completeand Completed Machinery

Standards

Laws + Directives

NotifiedBodies

Expert Committees

Robot Product(partly complete)

Robot System(completed machinery)

CEMarking

Certificate(s)

Declaration ofConformity

Legislative Bodies

Robot companiesUniversities,Research Institutes,OSH Organizations

Companies / system builders

Othercomponents

Other companies

Safety and Human-Robot Collaboration: Relevant Standards + Directives

Example EU:European Machinery Directive 2006/42/EC

Laws + Directives

Type A Standards(basic safety standards)

Type B Standards(generic safety standards,B1: particular safety aspects,B2: safeguards)

Type C Standards(machine safety standards,product level)

IEC 61508:2010 –Functional Safety

ISO 12100:2010 –Risk Assessment

EN ISO 13849-1:2015

IEC 62061:2015

ISO 10218-1:2011 – Robot

ISO 10218-2:2011 – Robot system/cell

ISO 11161:2007 – Integratedmanufacturing systems

ISO/TS 15066:2016 –Collaborative Robots

IEC 60204-1:2016

0) Self-declaration of safety-related conformity without interaction with Notified Body1) Review of risk assessment and mitigation measures2) Concept approval (in form of a qualified technical report)3) Product certificate without review of functional safety management4) Product certificate and review of functional safety management

Levels of Interaction

Certification and Notified Bodies

IMPORTANT:

– The certificate specifies individual safety functions and the safety performance to which they are beingcertified. The applied standards are named.

– The certificate is always for a specific version of the robot (HW and SW). It is not automaticallyapplicable for new versions after safety-relevant changes have been made.

– The certificate IS NOT for the robot “as a whole”. It is for the individual safety functions named therein.

EU: European Machinery Directive 2006/42/EC, Official Journal of the EuropeanUnion, L157, 24 – 86 (EN), 9.6.2006. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/DE/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32006L0042

USA: OSHA General Duty Clause, OSH Act of 1970, Sec. 5. Duties.https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=OSHACT&p_id=3359

Overview

Safety Legislation

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/DE/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32006L0042

https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=OSHACT&p_id=3359

Converted to national legislation in all EU member statesAnnex I sets forth “Essential health and safety requirements relating to the the design andconstruction of machinery”Risk reduction priorities (c.f. Annex I, 1.1.2 (b)):

– In selecting the most appropriate methods, the manufacturer or his authorisedrepresentative must apply the following principles, in the order given:• eliminate or reduce risks as far as possible (inherently safe machinery design and

construction),• take the necessary protective measures in relation to risks that cannot be

eliminated,• inform users of the residual risks due to any shortcomings of the protective

measures adopted, indicate whether any particular training is required andspecify any need to provide personal protective equipment.

European Machinery Directive 2006/42/EC

Note: thishierarchy isreproducedand elaboratedin ISO 12100

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:157:0024:0086:en:PDF

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:157:0024:0086:en:PDF

OSHA General Duty Clause

SEC. 5. Duties

(a) Each employer --

(1) shall furnish to each of his employeesemployment and a place of employmentwhich are free from recognized hazardsthat are causing or are likely to cause deathor serious physical harm to his employees;

(2) shall comply with occupational safetyand health standards promulgated underthis Act.

29 USC 654

(b) Each employee shall comply withoccupational safety and health standards andall rules, regulations, and orders issuedpursuant to this Act which are applicable tohis own actions and conduct.



ISO 13849-1 – Deterministic Aspect

February 16, 2017 (Source: ISO 13849-1:2015 “Safety of machinery - Safety-related parts of control systems - Part 1: General principles for design”)27

Designated architecturesfor safety functions

Cat. B / 1 Cat. 3 / 4Cat. 2

• Single channel• Proven components

• Single channel• Test function• Proven components

• Dual channel• Monitoring, cross-

monitoring• Proven components

Safety Performance Levels

ISO 13849-1 – Probabilistic Aspect

February 16, 2017 Slide 28 (Source: ISO 13849-1:2015 “Safety of machinery - Safety-related parts of control systems - Part 1: General principles for design”, Tables 2, 3)

PL Average probability of dangerousfailure per hour ( ) [1/h]

SIL (IEC 61508–1, for information)high/continuous mode of operation

a 10 ℎ ≤ < 10 ℎ No correspondence

b 3 × 10 ℎ ≤ < 10 ℎ 1

c 10 ℎ ≤ < 3 × 10 ℎ 1

d 10 ℎ ≤ < 10 ℎ 2

e 10 ℎ ≤ < 10 ℎ 3

ISO 13849-1 – Combining Determinism and Stochasticity

February 16, 2017 Slide 29 (Source: ISO 13849-1:2015 “Safety of machinery - Safety-related parts of control systems - Part 1: General principles for design”)

Standard Robots and “Typical” Collaborative Robots

Required Safety Performance of Safety Functions

(see: ISO 13849-1 “Safety of machinery — Safety-related parts of control systems— Part 1: General principles for design”)

• Worst case is severe, irreversible injury (S2)

• Rare exposure (F1)

• Difficult to avoid when exposed (P2)

“Actual vs. Actual” Strategy

Architectures for Safety-Related Robot Control

L1

L2

O1

O2

I1

I2

Cross-monitoring

monitoring

monitoring

MainComputer

-Generates

path

Input blocks Logic blocks Output blocksR

efer

ence

ang

les

AxisCom-puter

DriveSystem M

Act

uala

ngle

sA

ctua

lang

les

e.g.zone

super-vision

e.g.zone

super-vision

e.g.digitaloutput

e.g.digitaloutput

Jointangle

sensing

“Reference vs. Actual” Strategy

Architectures for Safety-Related Robot Control

L1

L2

O1

O2

I1

I2

Cross-monitoring

monitoring

monitoring

Main Computer-

Generates path

Input blocks Logic blocks Output blocks

Referenceangles

AxisCom-puter

DriveSystem M Joint angle

sensing

Act

ual

ang

les

Del

ayed

refe

renc

ean

gle

s

Model ofControl

Loop

e.g. zonesuper-vision

e.g. zonesuper-vision

e.g.digitaloutput

e.g.digitaloutput

Industrial Robot Controller

Maincomputer

Servocomputer

Drivesystem

M RG Jointpositions

• Program interpretation• Motion planning• Cartesian interpolation• Inverse transformation• Joint angle references (4 ms)

• Joint-space fine interpolation• Position control• Velocity control• Torque references (500 µs)• Filtering

• Commutation• Current control

Joint references

Torquereferences

Manipulatormechanics

Controller portion

Manipulator portion

• Verification of programmed motion• Speed limits TCP, ACP, WCP• Position zones TCP• Orientation limits TCP• Safe standstill (cat. 2 stop)

Powersupply

K K

Drive energyPower supplyAnalog signalsDigital busDigital signalMechanical

Pendant

Safetycontroller

Introduction


Safety of machinery



Research questions


Outline

ISO 10218-1:2011, clause 3.5– collaborative workspace

work space within the safeguarded space where the robot and a human can perform taskssimultaneously during production operation

Definition: Collaborative Workspace

Safety and Human-Robot Collaboration

Collaborative workspace

Types of Collaborative Operation – According to ISO 10218, ISO/TS 15066

ISO10218-1,clause

Type of collaborative operation Main means of riskreduction

5.10.2 Safety-rated monitored stop(Example: manual loading-station)

No robot motion whenoperator is in collaborativework space

5.10.3Hand guiding(Example: operation as assistdevice)

Robot motion onlythrough direct input ofoperator

5.10.4Speed and separation monitoring(Example: replenishing partscontainers)

Robot motion only whenseparation distance aboveminimum separationdistance

5.10.5

Power and force limiting by inherentdesign or control(Example: ABB YuMi® collaborativeassembly robot)

In contact events, robotcan only impart limitedstatic and dynamics forces

Clauses in standards and TS– ISO 10218-1, clause 5.10.2

– ISO 10218-2, clause 5.11.5.2

– ISO/TS 15066, clause 5.5.1

Risk reduction– Ensure robot standstill whenever a worker is in

collaborative workspace

Achieved by– Detecting worker presence in collaborative workspace

– Supervised standstill - Category 2 stop (IEC 60204-1)

– Category 0 stop in case of fault (IEC 60204-1)

Typical applications– Loading / unloading end-effector

– Ergonomic adaptation

Safety-Rated Monitored Stop (SRMS)

Clauses in standards and TS– ISO 10218-1, clause 5.10.3– ISO 10218-2, clause 5.11.5.3– ISO/TS 15066, clause 5.5.2Risk reduction– Provide worker with direct control over robot motion at all times in

collaborative workspace– Avoid / prevent worker presence under robot arm or loadAchieved by– Controls close to end-effector– Input means for motion commands– Zone limits, speed limits as needed– Enabling device, emergency stopTypical applications– Lift assist– Ergonomic adaptation– Precision load positioning

Hand Guiding (HG)

Clauses in standards and TS– ISO 10218-1, clause 5.10.4– ISO 10218-2, clause 5.11.5.4– ISO/TS 15066, clause 5.5.3Risk reduction– Maintain sufficient distance between worker and robot in collaborative

workspaceAchieved by– Supervision of distance, speed– Protective stop if minimum separation distance or speed limit is violated– Consider stopping distance in minimum separation distanceTypical applications– Working in common area on separate tasks, e.g. machine tending,

changing parts containersAdditional requirements on safety-rated periphery– Safety-rated position information

Speed and Separation Monitoring (SSM)

Speed supervision

Distance supervision

Protective Separation Distance


( + )

+time

intervals

distances

()

(+

)(

++

)

= robot speed= human speed= controller reaction time= robot stopping time

= robot stopping distance= final protective distance

= sep. distance at time= time at which to trigger stop

Protective Separation Distance


= + + + + +

=

=

=

Simple model assumptions (constant values) for and for in the reaction-phase of the robot motion can be made to give:

= +

= ( )

Values for the stopping distance should be obtained, asstated, from the data provided according to ISO 10218-1, Annex B.

Here, =“now”and =integration variable.

Condition for sufficientprotection at is

≥ ( ) .

time

−

0

( )

+ +

applicationmotion

reactiontime

stopping time after robot stop

( )

stopissued

( + )

stoppingbegins

( + + )

stoppingends

spee

d

−

Legendrobot speed, , < 0operator speed, > 0separation distance

0

sepa

ratio

ndi

stan

ce

time

protective separation distance

Intrusion distance anduncertainty factors

+ +

Clauses in standards and TS

– ISO 10218-1, clause 5.10.5

– ISO 10218-2, clause 5.11.5.5

– ISO/TS 15066, clause 5.5.4

Incidental physical contact possible

– Transient

• Free

• Constrained

– Quasi-static

Risk reduction

– Limiting mechanical loading of human-body parts by moving parts of robot,end-effector or work piece

Typical measures

– Low inertia, suitable geometry and material, sensory input, control functionsto limit speeds, torques, …

Applications in mixed environment, involving possibility of transient and/orquasi-static physical contact

Power and Force Limiting (PFL)

DC523 Collision KNX HMI 2011 SMDSO BJE

Classification

Human-Robot Contact

Limit criteriafrom

experimentsat Univ. Mainz

Model-basedextrapolation(not presentlyaccepted by

WG3)

Harmless

Model-basedextrapolation(described in

Annex A)

Low High

Relative Speed

Co

nstr

aine

dN

on-

cons

trai

ned

Co

ntac

tTy

pe

Basic Hazard Types

Human-Robot Contact

vrel

F

Transient Contact Quasi-Static Contact

Description • Contact event is “short” (< 50 ms)• Human body part can usually recoil

• Contact duration is “extended”• Human body part cannot recoil, is

trapped

Limit Criteria • Peak forces, pressures, stresses• Energy transfer, power density

• Peak forces, pressures, stresses

Accessible inDesign orControl

• Effective mass (robot pose, payload)• Speed (relative)• Contact area, duration

• Force (joint torques, pose)• Contact area, duration

Performance Bonus?

Combination of SSM and PFL

v

d

PFL

SSM

0 Distance robot-human

PFL + SSMR

obot

spee

d

Intrusion distance

vPFL

Speed and separation monitoring (SSM) only

Power and force limiting (PFL) onlyCombination: both PFL + SSM in same robot

Introduction


Safety of machinery



Research questions


Outline

Risk assessment

– Describe use cases

– Identify hazards, i.e. any sort of physical contact with manipulator, tool,work piece; these are to be avoided: no contact with moving robot

– For each hazard, determine

• severity, probability of occurrence, frequency of exposure, possibility toavoid at occurrence

– Evaluate risk (e.g. ISO/TR 14121-2)

– If risk level not acceptable, determine and implement risk reductionmeasures. For SSM applications, this means in real time, measuring ,adjusting speed , pausing motion if needed, modifying path if needed,triggering stopping function if needed to prevent moving contact,consider possible motion of operator.

– Proper design and verification needed to confirm viability ofapplication. Consider stopping distance (current load, pose, speed),condition of brakes (to hold manipulator + load), behavior of operator.Derive measures of economic performance such as floor space usage,average application throughput, initial investment, etc.

Challenges in Planning and Commissioning – SSM

Collaborative Applications in Industrial Production


Effective approach speed (closing speed):

= ⋅

Risk assessment

– Describe use cases

– Identify hazards, i.e. describe possible contact cases

• Exposed body regions, associated loading limit criteria

– For each hazard, determine

• severity, probability of occurrence, frequency of exposure, possibilityto avoid at occurrence

– Evaluate risk (e.g. ISO/TR 14121-2)

– If risk level not acceptable, determine and implement risk reductionmeasures. For PFL applications, this means a suitable combination ofchange application layout, reduce speed, if possible increase contactsurface areas. Note that manipulator, end-effector, work pieces,environment must all be considered.

– To confirm application viability, use verification tools incl. simulationto establish safety configuration (e.g. speed limits, safeguards,sensors, etc.) and economic performance of overall application (e.g.average production throughput, etc.)

Challenges in Planning and Commissioning – PFL

Collaborative Applications in Industrial Production


Human

Human

Robot

Introduction


Safety of machinery



Research questions


Outline

Internal and external

Research Questions


– Mechanical design– Drive train design– Motion control– Simulation environment and virtual commissioning– Classical user interfaces (pendant, programming language, PC

interface)

– User interfaces / Ease of use• Multi-modal intuitive communication for configuration and

programming• Task-oriented / application-oriented programming• Skills and skill framework

– Human-robot collaboration• Simulation-based risk assessment for applications• Biomechanical loading criteria• Safety-rated sensing for work space• Fast online estimate of stopping distance

– Environmental awareness• Distinguish persons vs. inanimate objects

– Sensor integration and sensor-guided motion– Machine learning to acquire new capabilities

Maintain and extend core competence / internal Response to new requirements / cooperation possible

SMErobot – http://www.smerobot.org/– Title/Objective: The European Robot Initiative for Strengthening the Competitiveness of SMEs in Manufacturing

(FP6 No. 011838)– Coordinator: Fraunhofer IPA, Stuttgart, GermanyROSETTA – http://fp7rosetta.org/– Title/Objective: RObot control for Skilled ExecuTion of Tasks in natural interaction with humans; based on

Autonomy, cumulative knowledge and learning (FP7 No. 230902)– Coordinator: ABB AB, Västerås, SwedenSARAFun – http://h2020sarafun.eu/– Title/Objective: Smart Assembly Robots with Advanced Functionality – Integrate a bi-manual robotic assembly task

in less than 1 day (Horizon 2020 No. 644938)– Coordinator: ABB AB, Västerås, SwedenSYMBIO-TIC – http://www.symbio-tic.eu/– Title/Objective: Symbiotic collaboration between human workers and robots – Novel hybrid assembly/packaging

ecosystem in dynamic factory environment based on human robot collaboration (Horizon 2020 No. 637107)– Coordinator: KTH, Stockholm, Sweden

EU

Examples of Collaborative Projects in Robotics

February 16, 2017

http://www.smerobot.org/

http://fp7rosetta.org/

http://h2020sarafun.eu/

http://www.symbio-tic.eu/

Opportunities– Further relief from unduly stressful or harmful work places and tasks– Lesser waste and improved environmental compatibility– Additional flexibility in industrial production– Economical growth and added prosperity for societyThreats– Is further technological development inevitable law of nature or can society pick and choose for good of majority of

citizens? Who is empowered and competent to do this?– Work place of the future, populated with additional machines with degrees of autonomy and interconnection, might

marginalize human worker rather than hold him as central actor in industrial production.– Integration of human being into increasingly digitized world incl. work place raises question such as right to „analog

existence“, right to reliance on innate human skills, future role of immediate interpersonal relationships andcompassion

– For persons displaced from jobs due to additional automation + autonomy in industrial production, what areperspectives for the new, more challenging jobs, which are expected to be created? How will society handle this?Mismatch talents vs. requirements?

Triggers for Discussions

Concluding Remarks

February 16, 2017

DAGSTUHL SEMINAR ON COMPUTER-ASSISTED ENGINEERING...

Documents

Transcript of DAGSTUHL SEMINAR ON COMPUTER-ASSISTED ENGINEERING...