Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The influence of the product characteristics on human-robot collaboration: a model for the performance of collaborative robotic assembly

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Collaborative assembly systems (CAS) are an increasingly important solution to the requests of the current market since they present the flexibility and dexterity of the human operator and the repeatability of the robot. For a CAS to be effective, both agents should carry out the tasks in the workspace without any physical interference. This paper aims to evaluate how the product characteristics influence the interference between the human operator and the robot. To reach the goal, we developed an algorithm that simulates product assembly in the considered workspace. The model also allowed to estimate the makespan achievable for different scenarios, showing a reduction, and thus an increase in the throughput. The makespan depends on several variables, related to the product characteristics and the process ones. Given specific conditions, we have observed that increasing the collaboration parameter from 21.06 to 48.98% led to a reduction in the makespan of about 20%. Lastly, the results obtained by the simulation were verified through a validation test, showing an error of − 2.39%.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Svensson Harari N, Fundin A, Carlsson A (2018) Components of the design process of flexible and reconfigurable assembly systems. Procedia Manuf 549-556:25

    Google Scholar 

  2. Di Pasquale V, Miranda S, Neumann WP, Setayesh A (2018) Human reliability in manual assembly systems: a systematic literature review. IFAC-PapersOnLine 51(11):675–680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Boothroyd G, Poli C, Murch L E (1982) Automatic assembly. Marcel Dekker, New York

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hu SJ, Ko J, Weyand L, ElMaraghy HA, Lien TK, Koren Y, Bley H, Chryssolouris G, Nasr N, Shpitalni M (2011) Assembly system design and operations for product variety. CIRP Annals 60(2):715–733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Faccio M, Bottin M, Rosati G (2019)

  6. Colgate J E, Wannasuphoprasit W, Peshkin M A (1996) Cobots: Robots for collaboration with human operators. In: Proceedings of the ASME dynamic systems and control division DSC-vol 58, pp 433–440

  7. Hägele M, Schaaf W, Helms E (2002) Robot assistants at manual workplaces: effective co-operation and safety aspects. In: Proceedings of the 33rd ISR (International Symposium on Robotics), pp 7

  8. Müller R., Vette M, Geenen A (2017) Skill-based dynamic task allocation in human-robot-cooperation with the example of welding application. Procedia Manuf 11:13–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Krüger J, Lien T K, Verl A (2009) Cooperation of human and machines in assembly lines. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology 58(2):628–646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. ISO/TS 15066:2016, Robots and robotic devices - Safety requirements for industrial robots - Collaborative operation

  11. Vicentini F (2017) La robotica collaborativa Sicurezza e flessibilità delle nuove forme di collaborazione uomo-robot, vol 136. Tecniche Nuove, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  12. Michalos G, Spiliotopoulos J, Makris S, Chryssolouris G (2018) A method for planning human robot shared tasks. In: CIRP journal of manufacturing science and technology

  13. Tsarouchi P, Matthaiakis AS, Makris S, Chryssolouris G (2017) On a human-robot collaboration in an assembly cell. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 30(6):580–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Pearce M, Mutlu B, Shah J, Radwin R (2018) Optimizing makespan and ergonomics in integrating collaborative robots into manufacturing processes. In: IEEE transactions on automation science and engineering

  15. Chen F, Sekiyama K, Cannella F, Fukuda T (2014) Optimal subtask allocation for human and robot collaboration within hybrid assembly system. IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering 11 (4):1065–1075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Nikolakis N, Kousi N, Michalos G, Makris S (2018) Dynamic scheduling of shared human-robot manufacturing operations. Procedia CIRP 72:9–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sadik A R, Taramov A, Urban B (2017) Optimization of tasks scheduling in cooperative robotics manufacturing via johnson’s algorithm case-study: one collaborative robot in cooperation with two workers. In: 2017 IEEE conference systems, process and control (ICSPC), pp 36–41

  18. Fast-Berglund Å, Palmkvist F, Nyqvist P, Ekered S, Åkerman M (2016) Evaluating cobots for final assembly. Procedia CIRP 44:175–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Neumann D, Keidel J (2019) A problem design and constraint modelling approach for collaborative assembly line planning. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 55:199–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Weichhart G, Pichler A, Fast-Berglund Å, Romero D An agent-and role-based planning approach for flexible automation of advanced production systems

  21. Tsarouchi P, Makris S, Chryssolouris G (2016) On a human and dual-arm robot task planning method. in Procedia CIRP 57:551–555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Makris S, Tsarouchi P, Matthaiakis AS, Athanasatos A, Chatzigeorgiou X, Stefos M, Giavridis K, Aivaliotis S (2017) Dual arm robot in cooperation with humans for flexible assembly. CIRP Annals 66(1):13–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Michalos G, Makris S, Tsarouchi P, Guasch T, Kontovrakis D, Chryssolouris G (2015) Design considerations for safe human-robot collaborative workplaces. Procedia CIrP 37:248–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lasota P A, Rossano G F, Shah J (2014) Toward safe close-proximity human-robot interaction with standard industrial robots

  25. Geravand M, Flacco F, De Luca A (2013) Human-robot physical interaction and collaboration using an industrial robot with a closed control architecture. In: 2013 IEEE international conference robotics and automation (ICRA), pp 4000–4007

  26. Meziane R, Li P, Otis M J D, Ezzaidi H, Cardou P (2014) Safer hybrid workspace using human-robot interaction while sharing production activities

  27. Luo R, Hayne R, Berenson D (2018) Unsupervised early prediction of human reaching for human–robot collaboration in shared workspaces. Autonomous Robots 42(3):631–648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Nikolakis N, Maratos V, Makris S (2019) A cyber physical system (CPS) approach for safe human-robot collaboration in a shared workplace. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 56:233–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Doran H D, Marti S (2014) Robot workspace monitoring with redundant structured light cameras-A preliminary investigation. In 2014 11th international conference on informatics in control, automation and robotics (ICINCO), vol 2, pp 611–617

  30. Safeea M, Mendes N, Neto P (2017) Minimum distance calculation for safe human robot interaction. Procedia Manufacturing 11:99–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Pedrocchi N, Vicentini F, Matteo M, Tosatti L M (2013) Safe human-robot cooperation in an industrial environment. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems 10(1):27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Fuseiller G, Marie R, Mourioux G, Duno E, Labbani-Igbida O (2018) Reactive path planning for collaborative robot using configuration space skeletonization. In: 2018 IEEE international conference on simulation, modeling, and programming for autonomous robots (SIMPAR), pp 29–34

  33. Vogel C, Poggendorf M, Walter C, Elkmann N (2011) Towards safe physical human-robot collaboration: a projection-based safety system. In: 2011 IEEE/RSJ international conference intelligent robots and systems (IROS), pp 3355–3360

  34. Matsas E, Vosniakos G C, Batras D (2018) Prototyping proactive and adaptive techniques for human-robot collaboration in manufacturing using virtual reality. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 50:168–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Oyekan J O, Hutabaratb W, Tiwarib A, Grecha R, Aungc M H, Marianic M P, López-Dávalosc L, Ricaudc T, Singhc S, Dupuisc C (2019) The effectiveness of virtual environments in developing collaborative strategies between industrial robots and humans. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 55:41–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Bogner K, Pferschy U, Unterberger R, Zeiner H (2018) Optimized scheduling in human–robot collaboration–a use case in the assembly of printed circuit boards. International Journal of Production Research 56 (16):5522–5540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Fechter M, Seeber C, Chen S (2018) Integrated process planning and resource allocation for collaborative robot workplace design. Procedia CIRP 72:39–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Meziane R, Otis M J D, Ezzaidi H (2017) Human-robot collaboration while sharing production activities in dynamic environment: SPADER system. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 48:243–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Cherubini A, Passama R, Crosnier A, Lasnier A, Fraisse P (2016) Collaborative manufacturing with physical human–robot interaction. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 40:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Johannsmeier L, Haddadin S (2017) A hierarchical human-robot interaction-planning framework for task allocation in collaborative industrial assembly processes. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 2(1):41–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Dragan DA, Bauman S, Forlizzi J, Srinivasa SS (2015) Effects of robot motion on human-robot collaboration. In: Proceedings of the 10th annual ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction, 51–58. ACM

  42. Magrini E, Flacco F, De Luca A (2015) Control of generalized contact motion and force in physical human-robot interaction, In: 2015 IEEE international conference robotics and automation (ICRA), pp 2298–2304

  43. Nakhaeinia D, Laferrière P, Payeur P, Laganière R (2015) Safe close-proximity and physical human-robot interaction using industrial robots. In: 2015 12th Conference Computer and Robot Vision (CRV), pp 237–244. IEEE

  44. Wilcox R, Nikolaidis S, Shah J (2013) Optimization of temporal dynamics for adaptive human-robot interaction in assembly manufacturing, Robotics, 441

  45. Tan J T C, Duan F, Kato R, Arai T (2010) Collaboration planning by task analysis in human-robot collaborative manufacturing system. In: Advances in robot manipulators InTech

  46. De Luca A, Albu-Schaffer A, Haddadin S, Hirzinger G (2006) Collision detection and safe reaction with the DLR-III lightweight manipulator arm. In: 2006 IEEE/RSJ international conference intelligent robots and systems, pp 1623–1630

  47. Limère V, Landeghem H V, Goetschalckx M, Aghezzaf E H, McGinnis L F (2012) Optimising part feeding in the automotive assembly industry: deciding between kitting and line stocking. Int J Prod Res 50 (15):4046–4060

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. DeGoede K M, Ashton-Miller J A, Liao J M, Alexander N B (2001) How quickly can healthy adults move their hands to intercept an approaching object age and gender effects. The Journals of Gerontology: Series A 56(9):M584–M588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. ISO 10218-1:2011, Robots and robotic devices - Safety requirements for industrial robots - Part 1: Robots

  50. Vasu M, Mital A (2000) Evaluation of the validity of anthropometric design assumptions. Int J Ind Ergon 26(1):19–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was funded by University of Padova - Program BIRD 2018 - Project. no. BIRD187930 and by Regione Veneto FSE Grant 2105-55-11-2018.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management and Engineering, University of Padova, Stradella S. Nicola, 3, Vicenza, Italy

    Maurizio Faccio

  2. Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Padova, Via Venezia, 1, Padua, Italy

    Riccardo Minto & Giulio Rosati

  3. Department of Management and Engineering, University of Padova, Via Venezia, 1, Padua, Italy

    Matteo Bottin

Authors
  1. Maurizio Faccio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Riccardo Minto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Giulio Rosati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Matteo Bottin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maurizio Faccio.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Faccio, M., Minto, R., Rosati, G. et al. The influence of the product characteristics on human-robot collaboration: a model for the performance of collaborative robotic assembly. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 106, 2317–2331 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-04670-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-04670-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation