Keywords

1 Introduction

Robotics has been playing an important role in industry for over 40 years. As statistics show, the development in the robotics industry is still very dynamic [14]. Information from [15] reports on the market situation after the pandemic indicate that the pandemic period, although initially associated with the suspension or postponement of some investments, was overall equally beneficial for the industrial, logistics and other sectors. The interest in production automation technologies, in particular digital solutions, has increased, and openness to innovation has increased.

Increasingly, robots are used in space exploration, education, healthcare, intralogistics, and agriculture [3]. In recent years, the distance between humans and robots has narrowed. Positive changes in the perception of robots are noticeable in the research carried out on the acceptance of human-robot cooperation [12]. There is a noticeable change in attitude compared to the results of the [13, 18] study conducted a few years ago on behaviour, emotions and attitudes towards robots. The research, described in the article [17], showed that assigning human characteristics to robots causes negative feelings due to a strong belief in the uniqueness of human nature. The negative attitude towards interaction with robots indicated the lack of acceptance and readiness for technological changes in society.

Collaborative robots (so-called Cobots) (Fig. 1) are a relatively new type of robots, more and more commonly used in production plants, laboratories, warehouses, etc. Robots also play the role of waiters, couriers and guides. The cooperating robots differ in terms of construction, weight, and tools with which they are equipped. This is due to the increased emphasis on safety issues [12] that must be ensured when the human and robot are in the same workspace. For this reason, it is so important to change people’s approach to collaborating with a robot, as the goal is to share a workspace. A robot that works safely between (or with) people can improve product flow and increase production by automating new spaces and processes. The combination is the most reliable and effective combination of a robot and a human.

Fig. 1.
figure 1

Cobots

Full size image

A great deal is currently being said about collaborative robots that work hand in hand with humans without any additional protective measures. The robots were designed to perform heavy tasks and it was definitely dangerous to enter the working area of a robot while it was manipulating a heavy element. Trends in robotization have been changing for several years (Fig. 2). The significant difference in the way of operation between cobots and traditional robots is speed they work with. Whereas traditional robots are designed to operate at a high level of speed and accuracy, cobots are intended to be safe. Moreover they are easy programmable and use. Due to high-speed work of the industrial robot arm, they are isolated from the workspace when operating to protect workers from dangerous, fast moving parts (Fig. 2 on the right). Collaborative robots are designed to work alongside people without barriers or fences, what is presented on the Fig. 2 (on the left). The cobots are able to immobilize themselves with the slightest touch preventing injury or any danger to nearby people, thanks to built-in sophisticated sensors. They assist human co-workers, accelerate tasks or assume monotonous and tedious work, leaving more complicated tasks to the human workers. Simultaneously, they are much easier to set up. Industrial robots are proper for large companies that production is standardized and repeatable. Smaller companies can benefit from the flexibility and cost-effectiveness of cobots.

Robot manufacturers set new safety standards that allow for unprotected collaboration. There is a very low level of tolerable risk which is considered acceptable when the robot is in the same environment as the worker.

Fig. 2.
figure 2

Cobots vs. traditional Industrial Robots [source: https://www.kuka.com]

Full size image

The paper aims to discuss the topics of physical and ethical safety in cooperation between humans and robots. In the dynamically developing field of robotics, the issue of safety is of particular importance. The observed trend is to construct robots that will be safe for humans. Due to the fact that cobots are intended to cooperate in an environment where accidental contact with it may occur. The essential is exploration of the potential hazards of co-operation while robots interact with humans closely. On the other hand, looking at the potential of AI and robotics, new technologies should be implemented in a sustainable and socially ethical way.

The paper is organised as follows. In Sect. 2, safety collaborative robots and human, collected information about safety standards in this area, is presented. In Sect. 3, ethical issues are described in reference to the first British Ethical Standard. Finally, Sect. 4 provides the summary and further development consideration.

2 Safety

Due to the rapid development of collaborative robots on the market, their increased market share (in production spaces and at trade fairs), their presence is no longer unusual. The features that distinguish them from traditional robots are:

  • a light structure,

  • compact design,

  • rounded edges,

  • hidden wiring,

  • different tooling than in case of traditional robots,

  • different functionality.

Collaborative robots are equipped with a number of solutions that allow for the detection and response to a collision with operators and elements of the environment [3]. They move slower than traditional machines, which is also due to safety reasons. The possibility of easier programming is also a big difference. This opens up new possibilities for creating completely new scenarios of robotization applications, as well as increasing production efficiency. In the era of the employee market or due to other unexpected situations, such as a pandemic, cobots are more conducive to maintaining stability and continuing work in workplaces. This is a strong argument for introducing robotic solutions. The goal is to develop companies and change the tasks performed by the production staff, rather than replacing them.

2.1 Safety Standards

Safety standards are developed to protect personnel from the risks associated with the nature of their work and their place of employment. They are formulated in such a way as to impose minimal restrictions or interference with the level of services provided.

The selection of protective measures is related to all elements of the robotic system, i.e. the type and specificity of the robot itself, connection with other machines, equipment with which the robot and machines are provided [1]. Proper selection of the system components is essential for the work to be performed correctly, effectively and for the necessary changes to be made.

The risk assessment of a robot and robotic application is based on the assumptions set out in the PN-EN ISO 12100 [1] standard. Due to the different nature of the hazards associated with various applications of industrial robots, the ISO 10218 standard has been divided into two parts [5, 6].

2.2 Collaborative Robot

It is not efficient for the production process when a robot inside a cell fenced off from a human being during its active work, has to be stopped in the event that the operation requires human participation. This is the case with standard robotic applications. Cobots enable the use in industry of repetitive and efficient work of machines with individual skills and experience of the operator. This is important because people are able to approach the solution of the problem and task in a non-standard way, while cobots show high endurance, precision and strength at work. In other, non-industrial solutions, robots can even approach humans directly, being a waiter or a nurse. The common feature of all cobots is their safety in contact with humans.

The challenge for cobot applications is to work without protective fences. The boundaries between the workspace of people and cooperating machines are completely or significantly limited. An additional disadvantage that must be taken into account is the unpredictable human movements. It is extremely difficult in the context of calculations related to speed, reflexes or unexpected entry into the work area of additional people. Standards for industrial robots ISO 10218-1 [5] and ISO 10218-2 [6] have been in force since 2011. The technical specification ISO/TS 15066 [8] was created to supplement and regulate the safety requirements of cooperating systems robots and their work environment. It is the world’s first technical specification that focuses on the safety aspects of human cooperation with collaborative robots. It provides detailed guidelines and tips for conducting a risk analysis for collaborative robot applications. The idea of allowing a cobot to come into direct contact with a human when no pain or injury is caused, prompted the creation of a new technical standard. The ISO/TS 15066 [8] standard defines for the first time the limits of speed and power allowed during robot-human cooperation and the risk assessment of the application.

Research on the e-skin prototype [9, 10] could open up new possibilities at the human machine interface (HMI) level. The use of e-skin will increase the security of cooperation and improve the interface by collecting data, which will be processed into information about the type of contact. Studying the topic may help to read the emotions of people working with the robot [19].

2.3 Intralogistic Robotics

Fig. 3.
figure 3

AMR, VersaBox, [source: https://versabox.eu]

Full size image

Cobots, or collaborative robots, are a large group of AGV (Automated Guided Vehicles) products. Analysing the development of robotics and safety in human-robot collaboration, we should also mention ARM-class mobile robots (Autonomous mobile robots). They are another type of AGV robots. Their main task is to transport products using advanced technology and are equipped with artificial intelligence [20].

Workers’ concerns about AGV are similar to those about cobots. Even more visible and emphasised are the users’ concerns about security in this case. AGVs are equipped with sensors and other security devices. The security system characteristic of AMR class robots is best defined in the harmonised standards PN-EN 1525 [16], ISO 3691-4 [7]. The regulations mainly concern the speed of movement of the AMR robot (Fig. 3): and the required security systems with which it should be equipped. The specific requirements are related to the two spaces in which the robot can work.

3 Ethics

In industry, robots commonly build, arrange, rearrange, transport, pack, and inspect things. For a long time, they have also been a visible support in medicine, e.g. they perform surgical procedures and dispense prescription drugs in pharmacies. Both medical robots and social robots establishing contacts with people evoke emotions and build relationships with the user. Referring to the [17, 18] experiment on attitudes towards robots using the NARS scale, it can be concluded that a positive or negative attitude towards robots can be manifested through emotions, evaluations and reactions, and these have an impact on human well-being. These potential ethical threats are recognised as having a stronger and deeper impact than physical threats, so it is important to consider various ethical harms and countermeasures.

Like most robots, social robots, cobots, AMR use artificial intelligence to decide what movement to make in response to information received through cameras and other sensors. The ability to react in a way that seems close to human behavior has been trained through research. It forms a perception that is social and emotional intelligence. It studies how people can read thoughts, feelings and even touch [9, 10].

3.1 First Ethic Standard

The British Standards Institution (BSI) has published the world’s first ethical standard for the design, production, sale and use of social robots.

Robots and robotic devices are increasingly used in industrial and non-industrial environments. The psychological factor is also taken into account as it takes into account how they affect the people with whom they share space and tasks. In addition to speech recognition, the use of vision systems to recognise emotions, new methods are also used. The distance between human and robot functioning is shortened (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4.
figure 4

RCH patient, Miles, working with NAO [source: Alvin Aquino/RCH]

Full size image

BS 8611 [2] provides guidance on identifying the potential ethical harm of the growing number of robots and autonomous systems used in everyday life. The standard also provides additional guidance to eliminate or reduce the risks associated with these ethical risks to an acceptable level. The British Standard addresses ethical issues in social, application, commercial/financial and environmental terms. It includes four pages of examples of ethical risks, related ethical risks and mitigation measures (e.g. Table 1). Helpful comments are also included, with examples of how mitigation and reduction of negative impacts can be verified. The standard collects the requirements and guidelines for the design of the robot, the protective measures used for protection and the method of developing clear information for the user.

Table 1. Example of ethical risk associated with societal and the robot application [2]
Full size table

In [2] section of ethical hazard identification reference is made to groups of humans or animals that are likely to be affected by a new robot or application, despite the fact the definitions in clause do not refer specifically to animals. In subsequent subsection other standards for risk assessment are also referred to namely BS EN ISO 12100:2010 for machines, and BS EN ISO 14971 for medical devices. The conclusion of the risk assessment, BS 8611 stated that ‘As a general principal, the ethical risk of a robot should not be higher than the risk of a human operator performing the same action.’

Issues related to the idea of risk assessment are nothing new in safety standards. However, the method of assessing robots in terms of ethical risks is an interesting addition to the set of tools that a designer, a robotics should use. The IEEE Standard Association, in 2016, launched a global initiative on ethics in autonomous systems and artificial intelligence. The result of a global initiative by the IEEE Standards Association was the document Ethically Aligned Design (EAD), which was based on information gathered from the wider public. In subsequent editions, the EAD documents expand on ethical issues and related recommendations.

Faced the ethical dilemmas in robotics, likewise, the AIs matter should be concerned [4]. The matter refers to role of AIs behave in Society, e.g. computer programs capable of making decisions for approving home loans. Including AIs in daily decisions process for numerous profound and important questions it is an increasingly common practice. Robots are becoming increasingly involved in our daily lives. In [11, 21] is extensively discussed AI and robotics of certain roles that ethics plays in the prosperity of humanity. The author [11] suggest that trust and cooperation play key role in this process.

4 Summary

The article presents the most important issues related to the development of robotics, because more and more challenges are faced by collaborative, social robots, AMR. They must be more reliable due to their responsible tasks, as well as a closer or even direct contact with people. The most important common feature of all these robots is their safe contact with humans. The presence of a robot forces the improvement of order, work organisation and changes the approach to the use of common space. The result is greater efficiency and greater work safety.

The basic role of safety systems in machine control systems is to protect human health and life. In the face of the dissemination of the Industry 4.0 strategy, many machines receive new functionalities. Due to the dynamic development of robotics, the changing nature of cooperation, new ISO/FDIS 10218-1 and -2 standards are already being developed, which are to eventually replace ISO 10218-1: 2011 and 10218-2:2011.

Another issue that is ethics in robotics is a major challenge to create a new generation of robotics standards. Ethical standards are a big step forward for people to trust new technologies. Without ethical standards, it will be difficult to gain universal trust and acceptance among the general public. Furthermore, ethical concerns can be incorporated into learning, planning and control algorithms. The issue of ethics, comparably to the safety, are currently considered in a very wide range, on various levels and in various fields of the new technologies.

The last important point in the development of technology in the coming years will be the mutual communication between the robot and safety devices, which will enable information about the exact position of the robot, as well as the human. Currently, the robot knows where it is, but does not know who or what is approaching it until it collides. The safety systems also do not recognize the exact position of the robot, nor do they know exactly what obstacle they are dealing with. The situation would be completely different if the robot could communicate with security systems and both knew their position and what obstacle was approaching it. This is the next step in the development of collaborative robots.