Increasing Safety in Human-Robot Collaboration by Using Anthropomorphic Speed Profiles of Robot Movements

  • Henning Petruck
  • Sinem Kuz
  • Alexander Mertens
  • Christopher Schlick
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 490)


The demand for flexible production systems in which the flexibility at assembly processes is increased by human-robot collaboration rises. In such systems the safety of the worker, transparency of the robot’s actions and mental effort are of special importance. As acceptance of technical systems can be increased by anthropomorphism, an anthropomorphic speed profile of a simulated gantry robot is compared to conventional robotic trajectories. Results of a study with 20 male participants, in which the influence of these speed profiles for movements of the gantry robot on mental effort and prediction time was investigated, are presented in this paper. The results show a significant increase of accuracy for predicting target positions for the movements with an anthropomorphic speed profile. The speed profile does not have a significant effect on prediction times and mental effort. Hence, design recommendations for an ergonomic design of human-robot collaboration can be derived from these results.


Human factors Anthropomorphism Human-Robot collaboration Occupational safety 



The authors would like to thank the German Research Foundation DFG for the kind support within the Cluster of Excellence “Integrative Production Technology for High-Wage Countries”.


  1. 1.
    Lien, T.K., Davis, P.G.G.: A novel gripper for limp materials based on lateral Coanda ejectors. In: CIRP Annals—Manufacturing Technology, 57(1), 33–36 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Faber, M., Bützler, J., Schlick, C.: Adaptive assembly sequence planning with respect to ergonomic work conditions, In: Lindgaard, G., Moore, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the 19th Triennial Congress of the IEA, Melbourne, International Ergonomics Association, Melbourne, 1–8 (9–1,4 August 2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hancock, P.A., Billings, D.R., Schaefer, K.E., Chen, J.Y., De Visser, E.J., Parasuraman, R.: A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Hu Factors: J Hum Factors Ergono Soc 53(5), 517–527 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Waytz, A., Heafner, J., Epley, N.: The mind in the machine: anthropomorphism increases trust in an autonomous vehicle. J Exp Soc Psychol 52, 113–117 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Duffy, B.: Anthropomorphism and the social robot. Rob Auton Syst 42(3), 177–190 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Salem, M., Eyssel, F., Rohlfing, K., Kopp, S., Joublin, F.: To err is human (-like): effects of robot gesture on perceived anthropomorphism and likability. Int J Social Robot 5(3), 313–323 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kuz, S., Schlick, C.: Anthropomorphic motion control for safe and efficient human-robot cooperation in assembly system. In: Proceedings of the 19th Triennial Congress of the IEA, Vol. 9, p. 14 (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kuz, S., Petruck, H., Heisterüber, M., Patel, H., Schumann, B., Schlick, C., Binkofski, F.: Mirror neurons and human-robot interaction in assembly cells. Procedia Manuf 3, 402–408 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zijlstra, F.R.H.: Efficiency in work behaviour: a design approach for modern tools. Delft University of Technology, TU Delft (1993)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Henning Petruck
    • 1
  • Sinem Kuz
    • 1
  • Alexander Mertens
    • 1
  • Christopher Schlick
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Industrial Engineering and Ergonomics RWTH AachenAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations