Cobots for the automobile assembly line

Akella, P.; Peshkin, Michael A.; Colgate, Ed; Wannasuphoprasit, Witaya; Nagesh, N.; Wells, James W.; Holland, Steven W.; Pearson, Thomas E.; Peacock, Brian

doi:10.1109/robot.1999.770061

Cited by 102 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These include: tool connection/disconnection (1,8), ball insertion (2, 3, 7), joint pivoting (4, 5), vision triggered emergency stop (6), and joint manual unmounting (9,10).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Collaborative manufacturing with physical human–robot interaction

Cherubini¹,

Passama²,

Crosnier³

et al. 2016

Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing

469

188

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the concept of industrial cobots dates back to 1999, most present day hybrid human-machine assembly systems are merely weight compensators. Here, we present results on the development of a collaborative human-robot manufacturing cell for homokinetic joint assembly. The robot alternates active and passive behaviours during assembly, to lighten the burden on the operator in the first case, and to comply to his/her needs in the latter. Our approach can successfully manage direct physical contact between robot and human, and between robot and environment. Furthermore, it can be applied to standard position (and not torque) controlled robots, common in the industry. The approach is validated in a series of assembly experiments. The human workload is reduced, diminishing the risk of strain injuries. Besides, a complete risk analysis indicates that the proposed setup is compatible with the safety standards, and could be certified.

show abstract

“…These include: tool connection/disconnection (1,8), ball insertion (2, 3, 7), joint pivoting (4, 5), vision triggered emergency stop (6), and joint manual unmounting (9,10).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The concept of cobots, i.e., robots collaborating with human workers in manufacturing assembly lines, dates back to the pioneer work [1]. In fact, cobots -designed for the assembly line worker -can reduce ergonomic concerns that arise due to on-the-job physical and cognitive loading, while improving safety, quality and productivity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaborative manufacturing with physical human–robot interaction

Cherubini¹,

Passama²,

Crosnier³

et al. 2016

Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing

469

188

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Better ergonomics is expected to improve production quality and production rate [8]. Production quality and production rate are possible to be measured in terms of OEE.…”

Section: Methodology and Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Monitoring of Collaborative Assembly Operations: An OEE Based Approach

Kivikunnas

Sarjanoja

Koskinen

et al. 2010

IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In this paper we present requirements and concept generation principles for performance monitoring of a collaborative assembly task. Life cycle aspects are considered and an Overall Equipment Efficiency (OEE) based monitoring scenario for a developed passive collaborative robot (COBOT) test system is presented. In this case main benefits of applying COBOT are expected to be: improved productivity, improved quality, reduced production cost and improved ergonomics. Since human and COBOT are working cooperatively human actions have also affects on process performance, i.e. OEE. However a human's and machines or a COBOT's efficiency are undistinguishable directly from OEE factors. It is possible to infer cause of lower efficiency from the variables from which OEE factors are calculated. One such variable is cycle time, which is used to define performance efficiency.

show abstract

“…Such applications range from surgery [6], [21], rehabilitation [18], haptics for training and diagnostics [8] to complex mechanical assembly [2], and many other applications for which human safety is critical. These assisting robots are also called "collaboration robots" or cobots [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Four-State Rotary Joint Control: Results With a Novel Programmable Brake

Tenzer

Davies

Baena

2012

IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-This paper outlines the development of a new programmable rotary brake which can restrict motion in one direction while allowing free rotation in the opposite direction. The design, implementation and performance of a fully-functional prototype are described, followed by the development of control schemes which allow different operational modes. A number of unique performance parameters for the brake are identified and analytical methods for their evaluation are proposed. The prototype, which was developed using commercially-available miniature brakes, has a cylindrical shape and is characterized by a compact, modular and cost-effective design which can be implemented into man-machine interfaces to restrict undesired user motion without the need for an explicit force sensor. The programmable brake concept proposed here is advantageous in these applications, where close cooperation with humans poses significant safety risks, due to the inherent safety of a mechanism which is not able to move autonomously in the event of a malfunction.

show abstract

Cobots for the automobile assembly line

Cited by 102 publications

References 3 publications

Collaborative manufacturing with physical human–robot interaction

Collaborative manufacturing with physical human–robot interaction

Monitoring of Collaborative Assembly Operations: An OEE Based Approach

Four-State Rotary Joint Control: Results With a Novel Programmable Brake

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About