When a human is mistaken for a box of veg - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: mendip_discovery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2023, 06:14:26 pm
content: BBC News - Man crushed to death by robot in South Koreahttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-67354709QuoteQuoteCan only assume safety lockouts were not in place. Not a nice way to go.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2023, 06:32:49 pm
content: It's weird, but dangerous machinery always should have a lock out/tag out procedure in place before working on it. So I would guess this was more about not following correct procedures and less about a failure of technology.

author: mendip_discovery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2023, 07:26:10 pm
content: I just hope there are sufficient barriers around the robot to prevent humans getting too close.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2023, 07:38:51 pm
content: Quote from: mendip_discovery on November 08, 2023, 07:26:10 pmFor the common robots, a better solution would be to resurrect the law requiring them to be preceded by a man walking with a red flag.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2023, 07:43:34 pm
content: That's unfortunate.Machinery designed without suffiicient protection to be operated safely, especially if it's autonomous machinery (not directly controlled by human operators) is just bad engineering, whether those are called "robots", "hammers" or crapshit.Since protection always has its limits or can be uneconomical, at least give proper instructions and procedures so that no human can get closer to the machine than a certain distance.Just because it is called a robot and even more so if it is claimed to use "AI" doesn't give any excuse to that fact. Bad tools are just bad tools.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2023, 08:54:46 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 08, 2023, 07:43:34 pmThere are very extensive rules in the EU about moving machinery and "Cobots" that make manufacturing here more expensive, but I'm fairly sure it prevents these accident.When I was asking quotations about for example a CNC glue dispenser, they have to include an enclosure for it, so that the operators cannot put their pinkie where it doesn't belong.

author: .RC.
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2023, 10:26:49 pm
content: Was it the T1 model? Who says it was an accident?

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2023, 10:27:43 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on November 08, 2023, 08:54:46 pmYes. Similar rules exist outside of the EU as well.Now some new kinds of machines certainly pose unique challenges, for instance machines that can move around "freely" in between humans. Traditional machinery is usually fixed and can only act on a limited volume around it, but that's not the case with "robots" that can move around.The gap is kinda similar as between trains and autonomous cars. There's a very wide set of regulations and standards for train transportation, but autonomous vehicles are largely more challenging in terms of safety and I haven't seen regulations covering them being even more strict than the ones for trains in proportion. My point is that, while yes, there already are a lot of safety-related regulations, at the moment it looks like we are being rather lax when it comes to the unique safety challenges this new tech poses. Some will argue that if we upped the regulation level even higher than it already is to make up for the added risks, no company in the world could ever market any product with these new technologies. And some will argue further that we have always done that.

author: floobydust
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2023, 01:51:03 am
content: Safety light-curtains are common on many automated lines, pick-n-place machines as well. He might have overridden it during troubleshooting.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2023, 07:20:55 am
content: Quote from: IanB on November 08, 2023, 06:32:49 pmyeah but warehouses are so fuckin shady the manufacturer can't rely on crook management to actually make it safe. if you actually don't want people to die IRL then they need to make it more advanced.I suggest you play Mario and the like, because your future survival is going to depend on keen instinct for dodging because of these god damn machines.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2023, 08:21:16 am
content: A sad bit of reporting…Blame the AI and the ‘robots’, not the mule that bypassed or installed the unit without safety interlocks,Karen at the shops, now has a new axe to grind about self-checkouts.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2023, 09:04:02 am
content: From the real worldcomes an interesting essay/exam question that can and should be asked and answered by students and practitioners of law, philosophy, and engineering - and actuaries.Compare and contrast the possible unintentional interactions that humans can have between (a) industrial robots and (b) partially/fully self-driving cars.That isfinallybeginning to be discussed by insurers, lawyers, and governments. It ought to be at the forefront of engineers' minds.

author: harerod
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2023, 06:56:10 pm
content: The most important lesson to be taken from this is that time pressure kills.A quarter century ago, about five people died on "my" machines every year. I really enjoyed when a public prosecutor asked for reviews of our designs to find a culprit who was going to pay for widows and their kids. Safety interlocks were part of the design. The operators found many ways to override those. Cut cables, pulled wires, screwdrivers rammed into alarm speakers, modifications in switch cabinets opened by copied keys.I remember one rather unpleasant episode at a German port, when a high ranking manager of a client yelled at me in front of several of his subordinates and told me to override certain safety featuresnow, otherwise we wouldn't sell any more machines. I politely asked him to speak to my manager. That modification never happened.At any rate, I feel sorry for that guy. Quite frankly, I remember way too many occasions where sheer luck saved old dumb me. I have seen way too many occasions where somebody was out of luck at the wrong time.

author: Xena E
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2023, 07:17:20 pm
content: I recall a story a few years ago that detailed an incident where a fixed robot in a quary that was controlled by an object recognition system to pick up rocks from a conveyor belt to place into a crusher for road stone, picked up a worker by his head and dropped him into the machine instead.It could only have happened if there were no physical guarding or lockouts in place.More recently my company were called in to explain to an H&S officer as to what fault modes could occur to cause failure of a coded light guard system it had designed; as an operative at the industrial facility where the system was installed had been injured when he walked into an active cell where the machine was running, palletising production packages. It was subsequently found that the machine could run regardless of the safety system status.When we investigated, it was found that the SmartScan units had been displaying an error sequence because their outputs had been bridged by an ignorant and incorrect addition to the safety wiring of the control system by a maintenance electrician. It later transpired that the person involved in the additional electrical work, had only ever been involved in domestic electrical installations and had never been trained in industrial control.Unfortunately it is not just the AI nightmare of machines in control as the sensationalists would have you believe that is the problem, it is also good old fashioned human ignorance and incompetence that is, and will continue to be the main danger with automated machinery control systems.

author: MarkS
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 09, 2023, 10:44:18 pm
content: It's sad, but seeing as how he was an employee of the robot's manufacturer and not the plant it was installed in, he should have known better than to get into the cage with a powered on robot. There are world-wide industrial safety regulations just to prevent this kind of accident and South Korea is FAR from a third world country. He has no excuse. It's sad, but it's totally his own fault.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2023, 10:48:43 pm
content: or its like do it or its your ass. of course you should stand up for yourself but thats the definition of a really bad day when you gotta do thatprobobly easy to get into months of litigation by refusing work even if you are totally right if you get some expert sleezeball. could say you gave the company a bad reputation by causing a delay. but being a tough guy is kind of part of maintenance position IMO, they need to stand up to people alot to stay alive. and if you are around a bunch of brown noses then no one is gonna be getting your back and it suddenly feels like your the man from marsbut that assumes someone is not being lazy or lying about safety to get more productivity.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2023, 12:41:48 am
content: Quote from: tszaboo on November 08, 2023, 08:54:46 pmSuch lockouts do help a lot. But there is no such thing as fool proof. Without the full story we don't know if the poor guy who was crushed did lock out everything, and was done in because someone else thought he was done and removed or bypassed the lockout or some other fault happened. Some here will respond that a proper lockout can't be bypassed (operator has only key for lock for example), but Murphy has unlimited power.

author: jonovid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2023, 11:03:25 am
content: the robot had a grievance with its handler

author: Black Phoenix
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2023, 02:26:31 am
content: This case makes me remember when I worked as a CNC maintenance guy (I have a non degree in Industrial Electronics and Electricity, who is a pain on the ass to get visas because is not a bachelor's but that's another question for another day - got visa denied in HK for a dream 9-6 job).The machines the company sold, Yamazaki Mazak, had safety interlocks, that we had to every single time we installed a new machine or made maintenance of an old one, put in working condition.As soon as I would leave the customers floor, such safeties would be defeated being by inserting a dummy key or rewiring it. For the customer was the difference in saving 2 to 5 seconds per part in a short 1 min operation.One of the customers had a "change of heart" when a worker in a CNC lathe with the securities defeated didn't close the door properly when starting the machine. The carbide bit broke at the middle of the operation, a sizeable chunk of it hit the rotating chunk by their jaws and come propelled directly to the gap on the door open.The user was in the NC control checking the data. Was a clean entry and exit on his head, through his brain, and he didn't felt anything. It was like a bullet wound.After that security increased 10 fold around the machines, tons of robots and automation was implemented, from part catchers to hoppers, conveyer belts, Kuka's and so on and preodically assessments was made by the company I worked for as "surprise visits" because some floor managers were again trying to defeat such to again save time even if the higher ups said no such thing would be done again...

author: mendip_discovery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2023, 09:49:05 am
content: The person made a mistake of working near a powerful robotic arm when it was powered up. Now I suspect this was becuase they were problem solving in a hurry as it needed to be ready to show off to the press.The guards and interlocks were no doubt not in place yet as that would clutter up the photoshoot.But part of me thinks there could have been some software safeties in place. The unit has image recognition and it's been taught to know boxes and products so why not go the extra bit and teach it humans and to avoid them. This would add extra complexity but at least it could help avoid an ED-209 moment.

author: AVGresponding
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2023, 10:59:25 am
content: Quote from: mendip_discovery on November 11, 2023, 09:49:05 amFor the same reason the floor managers in Black Phoenix's post were bypassing safeties to save 2-5 seconds per 1 minute operation.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2023, 09:31:26 pm
content: Quote from: mendip_discovery on November 11, 2023, 09:49:05 amImage recognition in "complex scenes" is never 100% failsafe. But probably it could have been done better. Though, safety has a cost, and if most companies using these tools favor productivity to safety, they're not going to buy more expensive tools just for added safety. Unless they absolutely have no choice.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2023, 02:32:40 am
content: I wonder if they are doing their savings calculations correctly. You have to save a lot of minutes to pay for the downtime that occurs from an industrial accident. Even without the insurance and legal and other resulting costs.

author: Black Phoenix
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2023, 05:19:00 am
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on November 12, 2023, 02:32:40 amIf it happens... If not happens it's still time saved in a operation, who at the end of the year means X amount of production extra that otherwise would not be done that year.That is the mentality of all this safety equipment defeating purposes.For example the operation steps to open a door in a CNC lathe normally with the safety not defeated is:- Program should be finished;- Rotate key from run to maintenance mode;- Press button on the panel to open door (releases pin in the interlock);- Slide door to open;- Press pedal to open chunk jaws;- Take finished part and put new one;- Press pedal to close chunk jaws;- Slide door to close;- Rotate key from maintenance to run mode;- Press run bottom to start the program.Now with the safety defeated:- Slide door to open while program is almost finished;- Press pedal to open chunk jaws;- Take finished part and put new one;- Press pedal to close chunk jaws;- Slide door to close while at the same time pressing run bottom to start the program.You saved 5 to 8 sec per part. In a 1 minute program you have a free part each 10 parts you do, multiply that for thousands and you see how much more productive it is.But you are not wrong in the thought plus insurance companies would deny any compensation to the company and worker if safeties were defeated.Although safeties would be put in working condition after any accident as machine crashes and before the insurance claim and insurance personnel to arrive at the factory to assessment of the situation.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2023, 05:22:11 am
content: yo that means their stupid if they need to switch out parts that much in serial production, like you need a bigger machine where multiple parts can be simultaneously fixtured.Like a parts holder with those fancy screws that tighten it from the bottom or something so you can put like a bunch of them in there.I expect the machine is being used at 5% capacity though because no one wants to figure out how to put more stuff in it. Like I am imagining a manufacturing cube with like a single small part in there.if someone has to do something every minute that does not involve a conveyor belt then its really suspicious. Like opening a door every minute.I am imagining like a 12 + inch kurt vise inside of a machine that has a interior of like 5x5 feet at least processing a single 2x2 inch basic angle piece, when you can put like 30 of em in there with the right fixture.

author: Black Phoenix
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2023, 06:13:17 am
content: If the only thing the machine does is that then yes, you are absolutely right. Optimize the max work space available to the max of parts you can fit inside and automate everything with parts pickers, conveyor belts and robot arms, kinda how JLCPCB does.If it is a company who subcontracts his machine time to other companies (who search for the cheapest possible rate per job) and may have different customers in a week for that machine (and doesn't have a ton of machines available) who probably will not request another work for them then no, is extra cost on a fixture or a mold (who is expensive to design and construct) who can only be used for that part and no more, going to the warehouse as dead tooling.

author: EPAIII
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2023, 06:33:52 am
content: I fear that this term, "Artificial Intelligence" is a bit of a stretch. And then we abbreviate it to "AI" to make it sound even less harmful.Just what kind of intelligence can we actually create with transistors and ICs and memory chips and computer code? Somehow I just don't think we are as smart as we want to think we are.