## 3 Smart Factory Use-Case
### Using Risk Analysis Component for Smart Factory Use-Case  
To showcase the risk analysis component in the context of the collaborative cell, the collaborative assembly of a gearbox for medical machines is considered. The use-case consists of several steps that need to be completed by the operator, by the robot, or by both. An excerpt of the use-case description using BPMN can be seen in Figure 5; for a description of the full model please refer to the Supplementary Material (File S1). This use-case was selected due to the peculiarity of its process, where changes are often introduced to cope with manufacturing resource availabilities and small batch production.  
To illustrate the usage of the risk analysis component in the use-case, the methods and software previously used at the manufacturing site are described. The method for documenting the risk analysis is to use an Excel spreadsheet with special functions designed  
Figure 8: The work cell for the use-case. (**a**) The work cell considered in the evaluation use-case. (**b**) The EE integrated in the use-case. A UR 10 CB3 was used for the implementation, which allowed for the implementation of the PFL risk mitigation. Moreover, the EE employed was a self-designed device, which was also proven to be safe by performing collision testing to determine a safe operation speed of the robot.  
in Visual Basic for Applications (VBA) (referred later as \"legacy tool\"). The spreadsheet is composed of multiple worksheets to define the involved resources (e.g., robot type, safety devices, material), describe the work performed, and to document possible hazards in the application. In case a user wants to perform a risk analysis, a table of the necessary resources must be created. This includes, but it is not limited to, robot type, materials for the process, and end-effector. Secondly, the work steps need to be inserted and matched with the different resources. Finally, the user assesses risk levels based on frequency of exposure, probability of occurrence, and degree of severity, according to [58]. For sake of clarity, an excerpt of the legacy tool can be found in the support material (File S2). Considering the use of the legacy tool for a process revision related to a change of resources, the user needs to go through the following tasks. Initially, the user inserts new resources into the appropriate worksheet. Then, the work steps where the resources are involved need to be checked one by one and the risks need to be re-evaluated. Finally, risk mitigations are checked against the new risk levels.  
On the other hand, if the revision process with the RA component is considered, the procedure unfolds as follows. Initially, the user changes the newly added resources in the asset tab and provides information about them. Once the change is performed, the modified resources are highlighted in orange, as shown in Figure 9.  
Afterwards, the RA highlights all the steps in which the risk should be revised according to the modified resources. To better guide the user, this is highlighted in pink under each step. Once the risks are highlighted, the user can select all the steps connected to the new asset via a grouping function and will be prompted to edit all the hazards connected, as shown in Figure 10 on the left. Once the hazards are revised, new mitigations are proposed, and risks are evaluated by frequency of exposure, probability of occurrence, and degree of severity. The user can save the new risk evaluation for the steps concerned with the modified resource, as shown in Figure 10 on the right.  
Figure 9: Changing resources in the risk analysis component. After editing the resources, the name of the replaced resource is highlighted in orange to simplify further assessment. The user can also filter according to “changed” with the relevant button.