Cargando…

Safety Assessment Review of a Dressing Assistance Robot

Hazard analysis methods such as HAZOP and STPA have proven to be effective methods for assurance of system safety for years. However, the dimensionality and human factors uncertainty of many assistive robotic applications challenges the capability of these methods to provide comprehensive coverage o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Delgado Bellamy, Daniel, Chance, Gregory, Caleb-Solly, Praminda, Dogramadzi, Sanja
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8236579/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34195231
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.667316
_version_ 1783714567592869888
author Delgado Bellamy, Daniel
Chance, Gregory
Caleb-Solly, Praminda
Dogramadzi, Sanja
author_facet Delgado Bellamy, Daniel
Chance, Gregory
Caleb-Solly, Praminda
Dogramadzi, Sanja
author_sort Delgado Bellamy, Daniel
collection PubMed
description Hazard analysis methods such as HAZOP and STPA have proven to be effective methods for assurance of system safety for years. However, the dimensionality and human factors uncertainty of many assistive robotic applications challenges the capability of these methods to provide comprehensive coverage of safety issues from interdisciplinary perspectives in a timely and cost-effective manner. Physically assistive tasks in which a range of dynamic contexts require continuous human–robot physical interaction such as e.g., robot-assisted dressing or sit-to-stand pose a new paradigm for safe design and safety analysis methodology. For these types of tasks, considerations have to be made for a range of dynamic contexts where the robot-assistance requires close and continuous physical contact with users. Current regulations mainly cover industrial collaborative robotics regarding physical human–robot interaction (pHRI) but largely neglects direct and continuous physical human contact. In this paper, we explore limitations of commonly used safety analysis techniques when applied to robot-assisted dressing scenarios. We provide a detailed analysis of the system requirements from the user perspective and consider user-bounded hazards that can compromise safety of this complex pHRI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8236579
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82365792021-06-29 Safety Assessment Review of a Dressing Assistance Robot Delgado Bellamy, Daniel Chance, Gregory Caleb-Solly, Praminda Dogramadzi, Sanja Front Robot AI Robotics and AI Hazard analysis methods such as HAZOP and STPA have proven to be effective methods for assurance of system safety for years. However, the dimensionality and human factors uncertainty of many assistive robotic applications challenges the capability of these methods to provide comprehensive coverage of safety issues from interdisciplinary perspectives in a timely and cost-effective manner. Physically assistive tasks in which a range of dynamic contexts require continuous human–robot physical interaction such as e.g., robot-assisted dressing or sit-to-stand pose a new paradigm for safe design and safety analysis methodology. For these types of tasks, considerations have to be made for a range of dynamic contexts where the robot-assistance requires close and continuous physical contact with users. Current regulations mainly cover industrial collaborative robotics regarding physical human–robot interaction (pHRI) but largely neglects direct and continuous physical human contact. In this paper, we explore limitations of commonly used safety analysis techniques when applied to robot-assisted dressing scenarios. We provide a detailed analysis of the system requirements from the user perspective and consider user-bounded hazards that can compromise safety of this complex pHRI. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-06-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8236579/ /pubmed/34195231 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.667316 Text en Copyright © 2021 Delgado Bellamy, Chance, Caleb-Solly and Dogramadzi. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Robotics and AI
Delgado Bellamy, Daniel
Chance, Gregory
Caleb-Solly, Praminda
Dogramadzi, Sanja
Safety Assessment Review of a Dressing Assistance Robot
title Safety Assessment Review of a Dressing Assistance Robot
title_full Safety Assessment Review of a Dressing Assistance Robot
title_fullStr Safety Assessment Review of a Dressing Assistance Robot
title_full_unstemmed Safety Assessment Review of a Dressing Assistance Robot
title_short Safety Assessment Review of a Dressing Assistance Robot
title_sort safety assessment review of a dressing assistance robot
topic Robotics and AI
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8236579/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34195231
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.667316
work_keys_str_mv AT delgadobellamydaniel safetyassessmentreviewofadressingassistancerobot
AT chancegregory safetyassessmentreviewofadressingassistancerobot
AT calebsollypraminda safetyassessmentreviewofadressingassistancerobot
AT dogramadzisanja safetyassessmentreviewofadressingassistancerobot