Robotics Safety: A New Era of Standards

by

Author: Denis Avetisyan

The evolving landscape of industrial robotics demands increasingly sophisticated safety protocols, and a critical revision of ISO 10218 is set to reshape the field.

This review analyzes the key changes between the 2011 and 2025 versions of ISO 10218-1/2 and the integration of ISO/TS 15066, focusing on functional safety, cybersecurity, and collaborative robot applications.

As industrial automation advances, ensuring robust safety protocols lags behind the increasing complexity of robotic systems. This is addressed in ‘Evolution of Safety Requirements in Industrial Robotics: Comparative Analysis of ISO 10218-1/2 (2011 vs. 2025) and Integration of ISO/TS 15066’, a comparative analysis revealing a significant shift in the forthcoming ISO 10218 standards towards a unified framework encompassing mechanical, functional, and-critically-cybersecurity considerations. The 2025 revisions not only expand upon functional safety and introduce new classifications for collaborative robots, but also formally integrate the technical specifications of ISO/TS 15066. Will this comprehensive approach to risk assessment and standards compliance adequately address the evolving challenges of human-robot interaction in increasingly networked industrial environments?

The Evolution of Robotic Safety: From Isolation to Collaboration

For decades, industrial robotics excelled within rigidly defined parameters, prioritizing speed and precision through physical separation from human workers. This “keep-out” philosophy, reliant on barriers and safeguarding, proved highly effective but inherently limited the flexibility of automation. As manufacturers sought to integrate robots more closely with human teams-driven by desires for increased efficiency and adaptability-this traditional approach became a significant obstacle. The very success of robotics in isolated tasks now presented a safety challenge: how to enable close collaboration without compromising worker wellbeing, necessitating a fundamental rethink of robotic system design and operational protocols to accommodate shared workspaces and dynamic human-robot interaction.

The increasing need for humans and robots to work in close proximity spurred the development of collaborative robots, or ‘cobots’, fundamentally changing robotic safety paradigms. Unlike traditional industrial robots designed with physical barriers and emergency stops as primary safety features, cobots are engineered for direct interaction with people. This transition demanded entirely new safety methodologies, moving beyond simply preventing contact to actively ensuring safe collaboration. These new approaches involve force and torque sensors, rounded edges, speed and separation monitoring, and sophisticated software algorithms that allow cobots to react dynamically to human presence. Consequently, safety assessments now center on identifying potential hazards during shared tasks and implementing controls that minimize risk, rather than solely relying on physical safeguards – a crucial shift for realizing the full potential of human-robot teamwork.

Initial robotic safety standards, such as ISO 10218-1:2011, largely concentrated on safeguarding humans from robots, emphasizing inherent safe design principles like protective barriers and emergency stops. These guidelines proved effective in traditional industrial settings where robots operated in isolated cells, but they offered limited direction for the emerging field of human-robot collaboration. The existing framework didn’t adequately address the nuanced risks arising when robots and humans shared workspaces, necessitating a move beyond simply preventing contact to managing the forces and speeds of interaction. Consequently, a gap existed in standardized methodologies for assessing the specific hazards present in collaborative environments, prompting the need for more detailed and application-specific safety protocols to ensure truly safe and effective human-robot teamwork.

As robots move beyond isolated factory cages and into shared workspaces with humans, a rigorous and comprehensive approach to risk assessment has become paramount. This isn’t simply a matter of adhering to existing safety protocols designed for traditional industrial automation; instead, it requires detailed analysis of potential hazards arising from human-robot interaction. Such assessments must consider not only the robot’s physical capabilities and potential for collision, but also the unpredictable nature of human behavior and the dynamic environment surrounding the collaborative workspace. Identifying potential risks – including crushing, trapping, and impact hazards – allows for the implementation of targeted mitigation strategies, ranging from speed and force limitations to the integration of advanced sensing systems and safety-rated monitoring. Effectively, this proactive evaluation ensures that collaborative robots can operate safely and reliably alongside humans, fostering a productive and secure working environment.

Standardizing Collaboration: Bridging the Safety Gap

ISO 10218-2:2025 extends the foundational safety requirements established in ISO 10218-1:2025 to specifically address the hazards present in collaborative robot applications. While ISO 10218-1:2025 provides general safety requirements for industrial robots, ISO 10218-2:2025 details supplementary requirements necessary for robots designed to work alongside humans. This includes considerations for force and pressure limits, safeguarding strategies tailored to shared workspaces, and specific performance criteria to ensure safe human-robot interaction. The standard acknowledges that collaborative applications introduce unique risk profiles compared to traditional, isolated robotic systems, necessitating these additional, application-specific safety measures.

The ISO 10218-2:2025 revision fully incorporates the guidelines previously detailed in ISO/TS 15066:2016, effectively elevating them to normative status within the core standard. Prior to this revision, ISO/TS 15066 served as a separate technical specification providing recommendations for the collaborative robot application safety requirements; its integration represents a fundamental change in how these requirements are addressed. This consolidation streamlines the safety assessment process, removing the need to reference a supplementary document and ensuring all relevant guidance is contained within a single, unified standard for collaborative robot systems.

ISO 10218-2:2025 places significant emphasis on the IntegrationProcess, defining requirements for the safe incorporation of robotic systems into shared workspaces with human operators. This process encompasses hazard identification, risk assessment, and the implementation of appropriate safeguards, including both technical and organizational measures. The standard details procedures for validating the complete integrated system, considering factors such as workspace monitoring, speed and separation monitoring, and the safe state of the robot. Successful integration, as defined by ISO 10218-2:2025, ensures a functional interaction between humans and robots, minimizing risks and maximizing collaborative efficiency within the defined operational parameters.

The ISO 10218-2:2025 revision places significant emphasis on the ValidationProcess to ensure collaborative robots function as intended within specified operational parameters. This validation is critical for confirming the safety and reliability of human-robot interaction. To support this, the updated standard incorporates up to Q new annexes, providing detailed technical materials and guidance for conducting thorough validation procedures. These annexes cover aspects such as testing methodologies, data analysis, and documentation requirements, enabling manufacturers and integrators to demonstrably prove compliance with safety standards and effectively mitigate potential risks associated with collaborative robot deployments.

Implementing Safeguards: Evidence-Based Collaborative Safety

PowerForceLimiting (PFL), as detailed in ISO/TS 15066:2016, is a safety measure designed to mitigate injury risk during physical contact between a robot and a human. PFL functions by actively reducing the force and speed of the robot upon detecting contact, preventing excessive pressure or impact. This is achieved through the use of force and torque sensors integrated into the robot’s joints, which continuously monitor interaction forces. The standard specifies performance levels and validation requirements for PFL systems, categorizing them based on their ability to limit force and prevent hazardous situations. Implementation requires careful consideration of the robot’s workspace, potential collision points, and the physical characteristics of both the robot and the human operator to ensure effective force limitation and adherence to defined safety parameters.

SpeedSeparationMonitoring (SSM) is a collaborative robot safety method that utilizes proximity detection to modulate robot behavior in real-time. This involves continuously monitoring the distance between the robot and human workers. When a human enters the robot’s workspace, SSM reduces the robot’s speed or brings it to a complete stop, preventing potential collisions and minimizing impact force. The system typically employs sensors such as laser scanners, cameras, or force sensors to accurately determine distances and trigger appropriate responses. SSM parameters, including detection ranges and speed reduction profiles, are application-specific and must be carefully configured based on a thorough risk assessment of the collaborative workspace.

The implementation of collaborative robot safety methods, such as PowerForceLimiting and SpeedSeparationMonitoring, necessitates a rigorous VerificationProcess to confirm functional correctness and compliance with established safety standards like ISO/TS 15066. This process extends beyond simple testing and requires documented evidence demonstrating that the safety-related functions consistently perform as intended under both normal and reasonably foreseeable abnormal conditions. Verification typically involves a combination of simulation, hardware testing, and software validation, with traceable results confirming that the implemented safety measures effectively mitigate identified hazards and achieve the required Safety Integrity Level (SIL). Furthermore, the VerificationProcess must encompass a review of the entire system architecture, including all software, hardware, and peripheral components, to identify potential failure modes and ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place.

Modern robotic systems increasingly rely on network connectivity for programming, monitoring, and data exchange, creating inherent cybersecurity vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities can be exploited to compromise robot functionality, potentially leading to unintended movements, data breaches, or complete operational failure. Malicious actors could gain control of a robot, bypassing safety systems and causing physical harm to nearby personnel. Consequently, implementing robust cybersecurity measures – including secure communication protocols, access controls, intrusion detection systems, and regular software updates – is no longer optional but a critical component of ensuring safe human-robot collaboration, as mandated by evolving safety standards and risk assessments.

Future Trajectories: Towards Resilient and Adaptive Collaboration

The forthcoming 2025 revisions to ISO 10218-1 and ISO 10218-2 signify a fundamental evolution in robotic safety standards, moving beyond traditional hardware-focused safeguards to encompass the complexities of functional safety and cybersecurity. These updates reflect an acknowledgement that modern robotic systems, increasingly integrated into dynamic and networked environments, present novel risks that demand proactive mitigation. The standards now emphasize a holistic approach to safety, extending beyond the robot itself to consider the entire application and the processes within which it operates. This shift necessitates a comprehensive evaluation of potential hazards, including those arising from software vulnerabilities and unauthorized access, ensuring that robotic deployments are not only efficient but also demonstrably secure and reliable in the face of evolving threats.

The landscape of robotic standardization is characterized by continuous refinement, reflecting the dynamic nature of technological innovation and expanding application domains. Current revisions to standards like ISO 10218 are not viewed as endpoints, but rather as milestones in an ongoing process of adaptation and improvement. As robotic systems become increasingly integrated into complex and unpredictable environments – from collaborative workspaces to autonomous vehicles and surgical procedures – the need for standards to address novel risks and functionalities will only intensify. This necessitates a forward-looking approach to standardization, one that anticipates emerging trends in areas like artificial intelligence, machine learning, and human-robot interaction, ensuring that safety protocols remain relevant and effective throughout the lifecycle of these increasingly sophisticated machines. The future of robotic safety, therefore, relies on a commitment to iterative updates and proactive revisions, guaranteeing that standards evolve in tandem with the technology they govern.

The dependable performance of collaborative robots necessitates a shift towards comprehensive and forward-looking safety protocols. Rather than reactive troubleshooting, a proactive RiskAssessment – identifying potential hazards before deployment – is becoming paramount. This involves meticulous analysis of the robot’s workspace, tasks, and potential human interaction, factoring in foreseeable misuse and edge-case scenarios. Crucially, this assessment feeds directly into a rigorous ValidationProcess, where the implemented safety measures are systematically tested and verified under realistic conditions. Effective validation isn’t a one-time event, but an iterative cycle of testing, refinement, and re-testing, ensuring that the collaborative robot consistently operates within safe parameters, even as its tasks or environment change. This emphasis on anticipation and verification is essential for building trust and maximizing the benefits of human-robot collaboration.

The trajectory of robotics increasingly prioritizes a harmonious balance between performance and resilience. Future robotic systems are being designed not simply to maximize output, but to operate reliably and securely within dynamic, real-world settings. This necessitates a shift from reactive safety measures – systems that respond to hazards – towards inherently safe designs, incorporating features that minimize risk from the outset. Adaptability is equally crucial; robots must be able to adjust to unforeseen circumstances, changing workloads, and evolving environmental conditions without compromising safety or functionality. This proactive approach to design ensures that robotic systems are not only efficient and productive, but also capable of sustained, dependable operation in increasingly complex and unpredictable environments, paving the way for broader integration into human-centric applications.

The evolution of robotic safety standards, as detailed in the analysis of ISO 10218, reveals a move beyond simply documenting hazard mitigation to understanding the emergent behavior of complex systems. This mirrors a fundamental principle of design; structure, in this case the standards themselves, dictates how a robotic system will behave in practice. As Henri Poincaré observed, “It is through science that we arrive at certainty, and through art that we arrive at the possible.” The forthcoming 2025 revisions, with their emphasis on functional safety, cybersecurity, and formalized collaborative robot integration, aren’t merely incremental updates. They represent an attempt to proactively shape the ‘possible’ – to anticipate and mitigate risks within increasingly complex human-robot interactions, acknowledging that a truly safe system is more than the sum of its documented parts.

The Road Ahead

The revisions to ISO 10218, and the emergence of ISO/TS 15066, represent a necessary, if predictably complex, attempt to map safety onto increasingly sophisticated robotic systems. The shift towards functional safety and formalized collaboration is logical, yet it invites scrutiny. A reliance on layered protection does not erase inherent risk, it merely redistributes it – often obscuring the locus of potential failure. The standards, by their nature, codify the known unknowns; the true challenge lies in anticipating those that remain hidden within the system’s interactions.

Future work must address the inevitable tension between prescriptive standards and the rapidly evolving landscape of robotic application. The current framework, while detailed, risks becoming a brittle shell, unable to adapt to novel configurations or unforeseen circumstances. A more fruitful avenue may lie in developing robust, adaptable risk assessment methodologies – tools that prioritize systemic understanding over checklist compliance. The integration of cybersecurity concerns, though a welcome addition, demands continuous vigilance; a ‘secure’ system today is merely a temporarily obscured target.

Ultimately, the pursuit of robotic safety is not a technical problem to be ‘solved’, but a continuous process of adaptation and refinement. Each layer of protection added introduces new points of potential failure, each simplification carries a cost. The task is not to eliminate risk – an impossible endeavor – but to understand its distribution and manage it with informed humility.

Original article: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.17822.pdf

Contact the author: https://www.linkedin.com/in/avetisyan/

See also:

2026-02-23 07:48