Standard

This document defines terms used in relation to robotics.

ISO 9409-1:2004 defines the main dimensions, designation and marking for a circular plate as mechanical interface. It is intended to ensure the exchangeability and to keep the orientation of hand-mounted end effectors.It does not define other requirements of the end effector coupling device.It does not contain any correlation of load-carrying ranges, as it is expected that the appropriate interface is selected depending on the application and the load-carrying capacity of the robot.

This document covers the general description of benchmarking test piece geometries along with quantitative and qualitative measurements to be taken on the benchmarking test piece(s) to assess the performance of additive manufacturing (AM) systems.This performance assessment may serve the two following purposes:– AM system capability evaluation. – AM system calibration.The benchmarking test piece(s) is (are) primarily used to quantitatively assess the geometric performance of an AM system. This document describes a suite of test geometries, each designed to investigate one or more specific performance metrics and several example configurations of these geometries into test piece(s). It prescribes quantities and qualities of the test geometries to be measured but does not dictate specific measurement methods. Various user applications can require various grades of performance. This document discusses examples of feature configurations, as well as measurement uncertainty requirements, to demonstrate low and high grade examination and performance. This document does not discuss a specific procedure or machine settings for manufacturing a test piece, which are covered by ASTM F2971 and other relevant process specific specifications.

Defines a ubiquitous network robot platform, and to identify its requirements and functional model. The use of standard interfaces for the ubiquitous network robot platform will ensure network robot service reusability, portability across several network robot services, and network accessibility and interoperability by the ubiquitous sensor network (USN).

Provides cloud computing requirements for Robotics as a Service, which addresses requirements from use cases. Robotics as a Service (RaaS) is a cloud service category aimed at supporting the development of robotics applications and services in a cloud computing environment. On the perspective of cloud computing service provisioning, this Recommendation defines the requirements for RaaS to identify functionalities such as augmented intelligence sharing, integrated robotic control, automated machine learning, data pre-processing, etc.

Robot Network Fabric and Cobots in the Collection and assessment of proposed use cases for 6G, explore their implications for 6G R&D activities, and enlighten the way forward. It is the second deliverable in the NGMN Alliance 6G Project and follows from its publication of '6G Drivers and Vision' in April 2021.

Report points to ASTM Committee F48 Exoskeletons and Exosuits; ISO TC 299 Robotics; and IEEE Wearable Robots

Provides an Overview on Projects and Programs on COLLABORATIVE ROBOTS

The purpose of the Robotics Domain Task Force is to foster the integration of robotics systems from modular components through the adoption of OMG standards.

The scope of this Technical Report is to provide test methods and metrics for validating separation distances of robot applications using Speed and Separation Monitoring (SSM) in accordance with ANSI/RIA R15.06 and RIA TR R15.606. This Technical Report also provides guidance on determining how speeds and positions of robot systems, workpieces, and obstacles should be measured, and under what conditions such measurements should be made.This document is informative in nature and is not a standard. The use of the word “shall” and “should” in a particular statement indicates the relative importance of specific criteria or features indicated in ANSI/RIA R15.06, RIA TR R15.606, and RIA R15.08.

This community group will discuss the applications of web browsers as the computer for controlling robots (robotics, in other words). And it will be also intended to feedback knowledge obtained from this discussion to standardization activity about Web of Things.What kinds of values are contained in using a Web browser not only in drawing graphical user interface but also in controlling and manipulating robots, and what kinds of difficulties and problems are there in that case? To search their answers may become the driving force of this activity.As an example, there may be the following questions in the discussion:Is a case applying a Web browser as a simple controller of the robots which does not have UI such as screens or the pointing devices still meaningful? For example, connectivity with web services and interlocking operation between robots (Swarm Robotics via web) may be one of its values.Is it possible to relate a graphical user interface of HTML to interactive and physical user interface of the robots? Is it meaningful? As an example, a relation between a physical push button and 'input' type="button" element in the HTML may deserve considering.Are cases using relatively low-level interface used in many robots such as PWM of the motor, digital or analog signal interfaces, I2C, SPI, UART and GPIOs by the application on the web browsers meaningful?Is real-time computing at the same level as RTOS feasible on the web browser-based general-purpose computing environments?An initial related activity is the Mozilla Factory Open Hardware Project.Furthermore, this group may publish specifications based on those knowledge such as webGPIO, webI2C API and so on.

This document gives guidelines for a uniform framework, transversal with respect to the different robot categories and limited to those robots and robotic applications characterized by human-robot collaboration, for the development and/or use of testing procedures, applicable to different robot categories and use scenarios. This document is informative and is not aimed at substituting or simplifying verification and/or validation procedures required by standards. The objectives of this document are the following: — define an approach for the development and use of procedures for testing safety in human-robot collaboration at a system level, based on safety-relevant human-robot collaboration skills and limited to the mechanical hazards; — define a comprehensive list of application-driven, technology-invariant safety-relevant human-robot collaboration skills valid across different domains; — provide a template for system-level validation protocols; — by way of example, present two system-level validation protocols, applicable to multiple domains. This document does not apply to the following devices, systems and applications: autonomous vehicles for the transportation of persons, drones, rescue robots (including ground, marine and aerial vehicles), surgical robots in relation to the body of the patient, passive wearable devices, external limb prostheses. NOTE 1 This document aims at providing harmonization in the compilation of structured testing procedures, to supplement safety validation of specific robot applications, building, where possible, on test methods provided in the relevant standards. It does not propose any safety requirement, nor is it intended to provide alternatives for or simplification of the relevant standards for each robot category. Users of this document are expected to be proficient in directives, regulations and standards applicable for the specific robot system and application. An overview of robot categorization is provided in A.1. NOTE 2 This document does not address “functional safety” (e.g. the performance level of safety-related parts of control systems), nor criteria for its validation and verification.