Rise of the Machines? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 03:28:08 pm
content: Unfortunate worker in VW factory was inside cage when the robot crushed him, I find it supprising that there was no safty devise that ensured the robot would not operate when a person was inside its operating range.http://www.iflscience.com/technology/robot-kills-worker-volkswagen-plant-germanyIt appears that the robot saw him as a part and picked him up.

author: retrolefty
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 03:38:09 pm
content: Quote from: G7PSK on July 04, 2015, 03:28:08 pmThis was during some kind of maintenance/instillation/checkout activity and standard lock out/ tag out procedure were not followed. Human process error, unquestioningly it's not all that uncommon.

author: Mechanical Menace
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 03:39:27 pm
content: Quote from: G7PSK on July 04, 2015, 03:28:08 pmThat's answered by the article.QuoteQuoteThe normal safety precaution is to keep workers and robots physically out of range of each other, it wouldn't surprise me if opening the cage normally shuts the machinery down. But how often do you ignore normal operating safety precautions and rely purely on human judgement when installing or fixing something?

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 03:57:30 pm
content: Yes I read that as well but even so allowing for the fact that at some time either for erection or maintenance surely there should be some device built in to the robot that says there is a person inside my operating range I will stop operating, cant be that hard to install such a device.An infra red sensor on the arm itself perhaps or a CO2 detector for breath or a camera for recognising shapes, no car part looks like a human.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 07:47:10 pm
content: Industrial robots do not "attack." They follow a set of predetermined motions that are programmed by humans into their controller. It is likely that this person was inside the enclosure while trying to program the robot, which is sometimes necessary in order to precisely position the end effector.Putting some type of intelligence on an industrial robot to not harm humans is much more difficult than it seems while still maintaining the utility of the robot. The solution is to separate the two with physical enclosures, light curtains, pressure sensitive mats, etc. All bets are off if the lock outs on those are defeated.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 10:06:57 pm
content: Acknowledging the need to be inside the enclosure with a 'live' piece of equipment - there must be a direct mechanically linked means of disabling the equipment.No software panic button or other 'dependent' method...Sure it could swing around and knock you out - but a simple lanyard back to a pull-pin might minimise many of these events. Falling, being knocked over or other physical movement will isolate the power drivers from the machinery... of course then someone has to manually reverse the manipulator off you for the trip to hospital!

author: jwm_
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2015, 12:11:56 am
content: Quote from: G7PSK on July 04, 2015, 03:57:30 pmAnd what about the high power lines, the assembly line tractor belt, the perhaps noxious fumes, the still hot welding torches, the bailing machine, etc or any of the many other deadly things in any industrial assembly line. Robots are not especially more deadly than anything else in there such that they need special sensors. humans are protected from them the same way they are protected from anything else, usually lockout-tagout. A worker could have been killed/injured any number of ways by ignoring safety procedures and I wouldn't want to rely on questionable sensors when physical interlocks are already available and way safer.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockout-tagout

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2015, 01:08:48 am
content: Quote from: SL4P on July 04, 2015, 10:06:57 pmThere is. It is the e-stop button that is right on the face of the robot teaching pendant. Every pendant has one. Generally one is only in the enclosure during teach mode where the robot in incrementally stepped through its coordinates at slow speed and each position is fine tuned by manually stepping the robot. No one should be in the enclosure during full operation which is evidently what occurred in this unfortunate case.And by law, the e-stop de-energizes the machine via hardware, not via the controller.There's just no magic solution for these situations that substitutes for procedures, training, knowledge and due caution.

author: briselec
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2015, 06:47:43 am
content: This brings up something I had a discussion with a factories management about. Standard policy is you can't work on a machine unless it is locked out but there are certain tasks that can't be done without the power on and safety devices overridden . Eventually they saw my point and decided in such cases the work has to be done with an operator present so he can kill the power or hit an e-stop if anything goes wrong.