25.040.30 - Industrial robots. Manipulators
ICS 25.040.30 Details
Industrial robots. Manipulators
Industrieroboter. Handhabungsgerate
Robots industriels. Manipulateurs
Industrijski roboti. Manipulatorji
General Information
Frequently Asked Questions
ICS 25.040.30 is a classification code in the International Classification for Standards (ICS) system. It covers "Industrial robots. Manipulators". The ICS is a hierarchical classification system used to organize international, regional, and national standards, facilitating the search and identification of standards across different fields.
There are 172 standards classified under ICS 25.040.30 (Industrial robots. Manipulators). These standards are published by international and regional standardization bodies including ISO, IEC, CEN, CENELEC, and ETSI.
The International Classification for Standards (ICS) is a hierarchical classification system maintained by ISO to organize standards and related documents. It uses a three-level structure with field (2 digits), group (3 digits), and sub-group (2 digits) codes. The ICS helps users find standards by subject area and enables statistical analysis of standards development activities.
e-Library Subscription
Create subscription and get permanent access to documents within 25.040.30 - Industrial robots. Manipulators
Currently subscription includes documents marked with .We are working on making all documents available within the subscription.
This document specifies requirements for the inherently safe design, risk reduction measures and information for use of robots for an industrial environment.
This document addresses the robot as an incomplete machine.
This document is not applicable to the following uses and products:
— underwater;
— law enforcement;
— military (defence);
— airborne and space robots, including outer space;
— medical robots;
— healthcare robots;
— prosthetics and other aids for the physically impaired;
— service robots, which provide a service to a person and as such where the public can have access;
— consumer products, as this is household use to which the public can have access;
— lifting or transporting people.
NOTE 1 Requirements for robot integration and robot applications are covered in ISO 10218-2:2025.
NOTE 2 Additional hazards can be created by robot applications (e.g. welding, laser cutting, machining). These hazards are addressed during robot application design. See ISO 10218-2:2025.
This document deals with the significant hazards, hazardous situations or hazardous events when used as intended and under specified conditions of misuse which are reasonably foreseeable by the manufacturer.
This document does not cover the hazards related to:
— severe conditions (e.g. extreme climates, freezer use, strong magnetic fields) outside of manufacturer’s specifications;
— underground use;
— use that has hygienic requirements;
— use in nuclear environments;
— use in potentially explosive environments;
— mobility when robots or manipulators are fixed to or part of driverless industrial trucks;
— mobility when robots or manipulators are fixed to or part of mobile platforms;
— use in environments with ionizing and non-ionizing radiation levels;
— hazardous ionizing and non-ionizing radiation;
— handling loads the nature of which can lead to dangerous situations (e.g. molten metals, acids/bases, radiating materials);
— handling or lifting or transporting people;
— when the public, all ages or non-working adults have access (e.g. service robots, consumer products).
Noise emission is generally not considered a significant hazard of the robot alone, and consequently noise is excluded from the scope of this document.
This document is not applicable to robots that are manufactured before the date of its publication.
- Standard108 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
This document specifies requirements for the integration of industrial robot applications and industrial robot cells. The following are addressed:
— the design, integration, commissioning, operation, maintenance, decommissioning and disposal;
— integration of machines and components;
— information for use for the design, integration, commissioning, operation, maintenance, decommissioning and disposal.
This document is not applicable to the following uses and applications of industrial robots:
— underwater;
— law enforcement;
— military (defence);
— airborne and space, including outer space;
— medical;
— healthcare of a person;
— prosthetics and other aids for the physically impaired;
— service robots, which provide a service to a person and as such the public can have access;
— consumer products, as this is household use to which the public can have access;
— lifting or transporting people;
— multi-purpose lifting devices or machinery, e.g. cranes, forklift trucks.
NOTE Applications for the automation of laboratories are not considered as medical or healthcare of a person.
This document deals with the significant hazards, hazardous situations or hazardous events when used as intended and under specified conditions of misuse which are reasonably foreseeable by the integrator.
This document provides basic requirements for industrial robot applications, but does not cover the hazards related to the following:
— emission of airborne noise;
— severe conditions (e.g. extreme climates, freezer use, strong magnetic fields) outside of manufacturer’s specifications;
— underground use;
— use that has hygienic requirements;
— processing of any material (e.g. food, cosmetics, pharmaceutical, metal);
— use in nuclear environments;
— use in potentially explosive environments;
— mobility when robots or manipulators are integrated with driverless industrial trucks;
— mobility when robots or manipulators are integrated with mobile platforms;
— use in environments with hazardous ionizing and non-ionizing radiation levels;
— hazardous ionizing and non-ionizing radiation;
— handling loads the nature of which could lead to dangerous situations (e.g. molten metals, acids/bases, radiating materials);
— when the public or non-working adults have access.
Emission of acoustic noise could be identified to be a significant hazard, but emission of noise is not covered in this document.
- Standard238 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
IEC 63439-1-1:2025 defines terms relating to electric power robot. It defines terms used for describing classification, constitution, function, performance, safety, working environment and other topics relating to electric power robot.
This document applies to the design, production, testing, sales, application, maintenance, management, scientific research of electric power robot.
- Standard29 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
IEC 63439-1-1:2025 defines terms relating to electric power robot. It defines terms used for describing classification, constitution, function, performance, safety, working environment and other topics relating to electric power robot. This document applies to the design, production, testing, sales, application, maintenance, management, scientific research of electric power robot.
- Standard29 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
This document specifies requirements for the inherently safe design, risk reduction measures and information for use of robots for an industrial environment.
This document addresses the robot as an incomplete machine.
This document is not applicable to the following uses and products:
— underwater;
— law enforcement;
— military (defence);
— airborne and space robots, including outer space;
— medical robots;
— healthcare robots;
— prosthetics and other aids for the physically impaired;
— service robots, which provide a service to a person and as such where the public can have access;
— consumer products, as this is household use to which the public can have access;
— lifting or transporting people.
NOTE 1 Requirements for robot integration and robot applications are covered in ISO 10218-2:2025.
NOTE 2 Additional hazards can be created by robot applications (e.g. welding, laser cutting, machining). These hazards are addressed during robot application design. See ISO 10218-2:2025.
This document deals with the significant hazards, hazardous situations or hazardous events when used as intended and under specified conditions of misuse which are reasonably foreseeable by the manufacturer.
This document does not cover the hazards related to:
— severe conditions (e.g. extreme climates, freezer use, strong magnetic fields) outside of manufacturer’s specifications;
— underground use;
— use that has hygienic requirements;
— use in nuclear environments;
— use in potentially explosive environments;
— mobility when robots or manipulators are fixed to or part of driverless industrial trucks;
— mobility when robots or manipulators are fixed to or part of mobile platforms;
— use in environments with ionizing and non-ionizing radiation levels;
— hazardous ionizing and non-ionizing radiation;
— handling loads the nature of which can lead to dangerous situations (e.g. molten metals, acids/bases, radiating materials);
— handling or lifting or transporting people;
— when the public, all ages or non-working adults have access (e.g. service robots, consumer products).
Noise emission is generally not considered a significant hazard of the robot alone, and consequently noise is excluded from the scope of this document.
This document is not applicable to robots that are manufactured before the date of its publication.
- Standard108 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
This document specifies requirements and recommendations for information models for software modules used in service robots. This document specifies the information model for software modules related to nine principles in ISO 22166-1. It specifies a structured method to define the characteristics of a software module, or a module that has a software-related interface (modules with software aspects, as defined in ISO 22166-1). This document is not a safety standard. However, it specifies the information necessary for software modules, including safety-related information. This document focuses on interfaces, properties, composition and execution-specific information, which are related to software modules. The information is utilized in the runtime and design/developing stages. In particular, the interfaces are classified and described into two types such as variables and methods. The document can also be applied to the following software lifecycle stages: the design stage, development stage, operation stage, and maintenance stage.
- Standard61 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document specifies requirements for the inherently safe design, risk reduction measures and information for use of robots for an industrial environment. This document addresses the robot as an incomplete machine. This document is not applicable to the following uses and products: - underwater; - law enforcement; - military (defence); - airborne and space robots, including outer space; - medical robots; - healthcare robots; - prosthetics and other aids for the physically impaired; - service robots, which provide a service to a person and as such where the public can have access; - consumer products, as this is household use to which the public can have access; - lifting or transporting people. NOTE 1 Requirements for robot integration and robot applications are covered in ISO 10218-2:2025. NOTE 2 Additional hazards can be created by robot applications (e.g. welding, laser cutting, machining). These hazards are addressed during robot application design. See ISO 10218-2:2025. This document deals with the significant hazards, hazardous situations or hazardous events when used as intended and under specified conditions of misuse which are reasonably foreseeable by the manufacturer. This document does not cover the hazards related to: - severe conditions (e.g. extreme climates, freezer use, strong magnetic fields) outside of manufacturer’s specifications; - underground use; - use that has hygienic requirements; - use in nuclear environments; - use in potentially explosive environments; - mobility when robots or manipulators are fixed to or part of driverless industrial trucks; - mobility when robots or manipulators are fixed to or part of mobile platforms; - use in environments with ionizing and non-ionizing radiation levels; - hazardous ionizing and non-ionizing radiation; - handling loads the nature of which can lead to dangerous situations (e.g. molten metals, acids/bases, radiating materials); - handling or lifting or transporting people; - when the public, all ages or non-working adults have access (e.g. service robots, consumer products). Noise emission is generally not considered a significant hazard of the robot alone, and consequently noise is excluded from the scope of this document. This document is not applicable to robots that are manufactured before the date of its publication.
- Standard95 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard104 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
This document specifies requirements for the integration of industrial robot applications and industrial robot cells. The following are addressed: - the design, integration, commissioning, operation, maintenance, decommissioning and disposal; - integration of machines and components; - information for use for the design, integration, commissioning, operation, maintenance, decommissioning and disposal. This document is not applicable to the following uses and applications of industrial robots: - underwater; - law enforcement; - military (defence); - airborne and space, including outer space; - medical; - healthcare of a person; - prosthetics and other aids for the physically impaired; - service robots, which provide a service to a person and as such the public can have access; - consumer products, as this is household use to which the public can have access; - lifting or transporting people; - multi-purpose lifting devices or machinery, e.g. cranes, forklift trucks. NOTE Applications for the automation of laboratories are not considered as medical or healthcare of a person. This document deals with the significant hazards, hazardous situations or hazardous events when used as intended and under specified conditions of misuse which are reasonably foreseeable by the integrator. This document provides basic requirements for industrial robot applications, but does not cover the hazards related to the following: - emission of airborne noise; - severe conditions (e.g. extreme climates, freezer use, strong magnetic fields) outside of manufacturer’s specifications; - underground use; - use that has hygienic requirements; - processing of any material (e.g. food, cosmetics, pharmaceutical, metal); - use in nuclear environments; - use in potentially explosive environments; - mobility when robots or manipulators are integrated with driverless industrial trucks; - mobility when robots or manipulators are integrated with mobile platforms; - use in environments with hazardous ionizing and non-ionizing radiation levels; - hazardous ionizing and non-ionizing radiation; - handling loads the nature of which could lead to dangerous situations (e.g. molten metals, acids/bases, radiating materials); - when the public or non-working adults have access. Emission of acoustic noise could be identified to be a significant hazard, but emission of noise is not covered in this document.
- Standard223 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard243 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
IEC 63439-1-1:2025 defines terms relating to electric power robot. It defines terms used for describing classification, constitution, function, performance, safety, working environment and other topics relating to electric power robot.
This document applies to the design, production, testing, sales, application, maintenance, management, scientific research of electric power robot.
- Standard53 pagesEnglish and French languagesale 15% off
IEC TS 63346-1-1:2024 contains the terms used by low-voltage auxiliary power systems in power stations, substations, converter substations and associated telecommunications equipment. Terms relating to low-voltage auxiliary power systems in nuclear power stations and railways substations are beyond the scope of this document.
- Technical specification11 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document specifies requirements and guidelines for the common information model (CIM) for modules of service robots to achieve interoperability, reusability, and composability. This document specifies the structure of the CIM and details the intended use and meaning of its attributes and subclasses. This document applies to service robots.
- Standard58 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document describes methods of specifying and evaluating the navigation performance of mobile service robots. Navigation performance in this document is measured by pose accuracy and repeatability, ability to detect and avoid obstacles, path deviation, narrow passage, and mapping accuracy. Other measures of navigation performance are available but are not covered in this document. The criteria and related test methods are applicable only to mobile platforms that are in contact with the travel surface. For evaluating the characteristics of manipulators, ISO 9283 applies. This document deals with indoor environments only. However, the depicted tests can also be applicable for robots operating in outdoor environments, as described in Annex A. This document is not applicable for the verification or validation of safety requirements. It does not deal with safety requirements for test personnel during testing.
- Standard24 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document specifies methods of measuring forces and pressures in physical human-robot contacts. It also specifies methods for analyzing the measured forces and pressures. It further specifies the characteristics of pressure-force measurement devices (PFMD). This document applies to collaborative applications deployed in an industrial or service environment for professional use. This document does not apply to non-professional robots (i.e. consumer robots) or medical robots, although the measurement methods presented can be applied in these areas, if deemed appropriate. Additionally, this document does not apply to organizational aspects for performing contact measurements (e.g. responsibilities or data management), assessment of other mechanical contact types (e.g. friction or shearing), assessment of other contact-related hazards (e.g. falling, electrical or chemical hazards). Further, this document does not set requirements for specific PFMD-design or specify methods to identify contact hazards.
- Technical specification41 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document specifies the requirements of safety management systems for application services provided by service robots [application service safety management system (hereafter ASSMS)] that an application service provider can use for the safety of its users and its third parties when it provides application service in unstructured human spaces with trained and untrained persons (e.g. giving directions for visitors in airport or shopping mall, carrying goods to patients in hospital, delivering food to customers in restaurant.) This document is applicable to any organization that wishes to: a) improve safety performance of application services provided by service robots, b) establish, implement, maintain and improve safety management systems for application services provided by service robots, c) assure itself of conformity with its stated application service safety policy, and d) demonstrate conformity with this document. The requirements of this document can be conformed to by integrating safety management systems for application services provided by service robots into, or making it compatible with, other management systems or processes within the organization. The requirements of this document can be conformed to by multiple organizations without omission depending on what is done as an organization and safety management. Although intended for application services provided by service robots, this document can also be applied to services using robots other than service robots. This document is not intended to be used as a product safety standard. NOTE There are cases where the safety management systems for application services provided by service robots established in accordance with the requirements of this document cannot apply directly when the service robots to be used, robot systems, contents of service, places of operation, users or so, differ.
- Standard41 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Remote Viewing Components:
4.2 The long-term applicability of a remotely operated radiological facility will be greatly affected by the provisions for remote viewing of normal and off-normal operations within the facility. The deployment of remote viewing systems can most efficiently be addressed during the design and construction phases.
4.2.1 The purpose of this guide is to provide general guidelines for the design and operation of remote viewing equipment to ensure longevity and reliability throughout the period of service.
4.2.2 It is intended that this guide record the general conditions and practices that experience has shown are necessary to minimize equipment failures and maximize the effectiveness and utility of remote viewing equipment. It is also intended to inform designers and engineers of those features that are highly desirable for the selection of equipment that has proven reliable in high radiation environments.
4.2.3 This guide is intended as a supplement to other standards, and to federal and state regulations, codes, and criteria applicable to the design of equipment intended for hot cell use.
4.2.4 This guide is intended to be generic and applies to a wide range of types and configurations of hot cell equipment and remote viewing systems.
SCOPE
1.1 Intent:
1.1.1 This guide establishes the minimum requirements for viewing systems for remotely operated facilities, including hot cells (shielded cells), used for the processing and handling of nuclear and radioactive materials. The intent of this guide is to aid in the design, selection, installation, modification, fabrication, and quality assurance of remote viewing systems to maximize their usefulness and to minimize equipment failures.
1.1.2 It is intended that this guide record the principles and caveats that experience has shown to be essential to the design, fabrication, installation, maintenance, repair, replacement, and, decontamination and decommissioning of remote viewing equipment capable of meeting the stringent demands of operating, dependably and safely, in a hot cell environment where operator visibility is limited due to the radiation exposure hazards.
1.1.3 This guide is intended to apply to methods of remote viewing for nuclear applications but may be applicable to any environment where remote operational viewing is desirable.
1.2 Applicability:
1.2.1 This guide applies to, but is not limited to, radiation hardened and non-radiation hardened cameras (black-and-white and color), lenses, camera housings and positioners, periscopes, through wall/roof viewing, remotely deployable cameras, crane/robot mounted cameras, endoscope cameras, borescopes, video probes, flexible probes, mirrors, lighting, fiber lighting, and support equipment.
1.2.2 This guide is intended to be applicable to equipment used under one or more of the following conditions:
1.2.2.1 The remote operation facility that contains a significant radiation hazard to man or the environment.
1.2.2.2 The facility equipment can neither be accessed directly for purposes of operation or maintenance, nor can the equipment be viewed directly, for example, without shielding viewing windows, periscopes, or a video monitoring system.
1.2.2.3 The facility can be viewed directly but portions of the views are restricted (for example, the back or underside of objects) or where higher magnification or specialized viewing is beneficial.
1.2.3 The remote viewing equipment may be intended for either long-term application (commonly, in excess of several years) or for short-term usage (for example, troubleshooting). Both types of applications are addressed in sections that follow.
1.2.4 This guide is not intended to cover the detailed design and application of remote handling connectors for services (for example, electrical, instrumentation, video, etc.).
1.2.5 The system of units employed in this guide is the metric ...
- Guide26 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Guide26 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. The operational endurance of a ground robot significantly impacts the performance of the robot during a variety of tasks. Robot endurance is a complex function of robot design, control scheme design, and energy storage selection. This test method evaluates the endurance of a robot through continuous operation on a complex surface. The continuous pitch/roll ramp terrain chosen for endurance testing specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas. The endurance test standard provides a method in which the operational endurance of a large variety of robot sizes and locomotion system designs may be compared. The test provides both a measure of the endurance of the robot and a measure of the reliability of the robot when operating continuously for extended periods of time on complex terrains.
5.2 The scale of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used i...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the mission endurance of a robot while traversing complex terrains in the form of continuous pitch/roll ramps or other standard terrains in the terrain suite. This test method is one of several ground robot tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.7 This international standard was develo...
- Standard12 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document specifies requirements for the integration of industrial robot applications and industrial robot cells. The following are addressed:
— the design, integration, commissioning, operation, maintenance, decommissioning and disposal;
— integration of machines and components;
— information for use for the design, integration, commissioning, operation, maintenance, decommissioning and disposal.
This document is not applicable to the following uses and applications of industrial robots:
— underwater;
— law enforcement;
— military (defence);
— airborne and space, including outer space;
— medical;
— healthcare of a person;
— prosthetics and other aids for the physically impaired;
— service robots, which provide a service to a person and as such the public can have access;
— consumer products, as this is household use to which the public can have access;
— lifting or transporting people;
— multi-purpose lifting devices or machinery, e.g. cranes, forklift trucks.
NOTE Applications for the automation of laboratories are not considered as medical or healthcare of a person.
This document deals with the significant hazards, hazardous situations or hazardous events when used as intended and under specified conditions of misuse which are reasonably foreseeable by the integrator.
This document provides basic requirements for industrial robot applications, but does not cover the hazards related to the following:
— emission of airborne noise;
— severe conditions (e.g. extreme climates, freezer use, strong magnetic fields) outside of manufacturer’s specifications;
— underground use;
— use that has hygienic requirements;
— processing of any material (e.g. food, cosmetics, pharmaceutical, metal);
— use in nuclear environments;
— use in potentially explosive environments;
— mobility when robots or manipulators are integrated with driverless industrial trucks;
— mobility when robots or manipulators are integrated with mobile platforms;
— use in environments with hazardous ionizing and non-ionizing radiation levels;
— hazardous ionizing and non-ionizing radiation;
— handling loads the nature of which could lead to dangerous situations (e.g. molten metals, acids/bases, radiating materials);
— when the public or non-working adults have access.
Emission of acoustic noise could be identified to be a significant hazard, but emission of noise is not covered in this document.
- Standard238 pagesEnglish languagee-Library read for1 day
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The significance of the information to be recorded in a test report allows for exoskeleton safety and performance to be contextualized with the exoskeleton configuration. Exoskeleton tests can also be replicated across similar or different exoskeletons by using this practice to record the exoskeleton test configuration in a standardized way.
5.2 Limitations of the practice are that not all exoskeletons have the same capabilities or configuration parameters. For example, for capabilities, an exoskeleton that moves the legs with electromyography during rehabilitation may behave differently in repeated use over time or within different gait courses (for example, straight or curved). For configuration, an exoskeleton that moves the legs with electromyography during rehabilitation may have varying signal gain/amplification settings.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes a means to record the exoskeleton configuration when testing. This practice provides a method for recording exoskeleton hardware and software control parameters.
1.2 This practice: contextualizes the exoskeleton configuration during a test, including the identification and adjustment of main configuration parameters and the addition of other equipment (for example, cameras, markers) used during tests; provides a basis for comparison of the test circumstances across different exoskeletons or tests, or both (for example, varying power or spring settings, prior exoskeleton use, maximum control settings); and allows a test to be recreated.
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are not precise mathematical conversions to imperial units. They are close approximate equivalents for the purpose of specifying exoskeleton characteristics while maintaining repeatability and reproducibility of the test method results. These values given in parentheses are provided for information only and are not considered standard.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard10 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Beams and beams with platforms can vary greatly in, for example: length, width, height, quantity, geometry, surface coatings, and for a variety of industries. Fig. 2 shows examples of various beams and beams with platforms.
FIG. 2 Example Beams: (a) Steel Construction Beams; (b) Steel Construction Beam to a Platform; (c) Log Construction Beam; (d) Playground Log Beam; (e) Log Beam across Water; and (f) Balance Beam used for Gymnastics
5.2 Exoskeletons are being used in the industrial/occupational, military, response, medical, and recreational sectors to enhance safety and effectiveness of the user to perform tasks. Traversing beams are used in many tasks performed and may include, for example, upper, lower, or full body movement in order to complete the task. Dependent upon the task, it may require people to traverse various ground and beam surfaces while wearing an exoskeleton. For example, an exoskeleton may be used to help during construction tasks where workers in exoskeletons traverse beams or beams and platforms with and without carrying loads, indoors or outdoors, as part of their daily activities. The testing results of exoskeletons shall describe, in a statistically significant way (see guidance in Appendix X1), how reliably the exoskeleton is able to support tasks within the specified types of environments, confinements, and terrains, and thus provide sufficiently high levels of confidence to determine the applicability of the exoskeleton.
5.3 This test method addresses exoskeleton safety and performance requirements expressed by manufacturing, emergency responders, military, or other organizations requesting this test. The safety and performance data captured within this test method are indicative of the test exoskeleton’s and the exoskeleton user’s capabilities. Having available direct information from tested exoskeleton(s) with associated performance data to guide procurement and deployment decisions is essential to exoskeleton purchasers an...
SCOPE
1.1 Purpose:
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of exoskeleton use test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate an exoskeleton’s (see Terminology F3323) safety (see 1.4) or performance, or both, when traversing beams.
1.1.2 Exoskeletons shall possess a certain set of allowable exoskeleton user movement capabilities, including user-motion adaptability, to suit operations such as: industrial/occupational, military, response, medical, or recreational.
1.1.3 Environments in these typical sectors often pose constraints to exoskeleton user movement to various degrees. Being able to traverse beams, as intended by the user or test requestor, while using an exoskeleton, is essential for exoskeleton deployment for a variety of tasks (for example, ascending/descending stairs, ramps, hills). This test method specifies test setup, procedure, and recording to standardize this beams task for testing exoskeleton user movement.
1.1.4 Exoskeletons need to function as intended, regardless of types of tasks and terrain complexities (for example, carpet, metal, masonry, rock, wood). Required movement capabilities may include, for example: walking, running, crawling, climbing, traversing gaps, hurdles, stairs, beams, slopes, various types of floor surfaces or terrains, or confined spaces, or combinations thereof. Standard test methods are required to evaluate whether or not exoskeletons meet these requirements.
1.1.5 ASTM Subcommittee F48.03 develops and maintains international standards for task performance and environmental considerations that include but are not limited to, standards for safety, quality, and efficiency. This subcommittee aims to develop standards for any exoskeleton application as exemplified as in 1.1.2. The F48.03 test suite consists of a set of test methods for evaluating exoskeleton capability requirements. This beams test method is a part of the test suite. The setup, procedure,...
- Standard21 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The significance of the information to be recorded in a test report allows for exoskeleton safety and performance to be contextualized with the exoskeleton fit to the user. Exoskeleton tests can also be replicated across similar or different exoskeletons by using this practice to record the exoskeleton fit to the user for a test in a standardized way.
5.2 Limitations of the practice are that not all exoskeletons have the same connections to the body and fit to all users, and therefore, fit to the user may change the exoskeleton capabilities. For example, as users vary in size, shape, gender, etc., an exoskeleton that is fit to one user may allow an increase or decrease in torque applied to the arms, legs, etc. as compared to another user, especially users at the upper and lower limits of manufacturer-suggested exoskeleton sizing. Another example is that an exoskeleton that is not fit properly to a user may be uncomfortable, and as a result the user may not perform tasks as long, as fast, as strong/delicately, or many other possible outcomes.
5.3 It is expected that all exoskeleton tests require the exoskeleton to be fit properly to the user according to manufacturer specifications. However, as testing exoskeletons can vary, so can fit to the user, and variations in fit may also be tested. For example, a test may be performed with the exoskeleton not fit properly to the users’ legs (for example, longer fit on shorter legs) to evaluate performance changes when the task requires the user to stand on their toes. Should exoskeleton tests be performed with the exoskeleton not fit properly to the user, the test requestor should verify with the manufacturer that the exoskeleton will not harm the user as a result of a bad fit, and provide this information to the test administrator to record on the test report.
5.4 Additional fit and measurement information may be found in Terminology D5219, Practice E3003, and Practice F1731.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes a means to record the exoskeleton fit to the user when testing. The practice provides a method for recording exoskeleton: alignment to the user, component distances from the body, sizing, and subjective comfort using a standard recording method.
1.2 This practice is intended to be used with other exoskeleton test methods and practices to provide a clear representation of the exoskeleton fit to the user measured along body planes; provides a basis for comparison of the test circumstances across different exoskeletons or tests, or both; and allows a test to be recreated.
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are not precise mathematical conversions to imperial units. They are close approximate equivalents for the purpose of specifying exoskeleton characteristics while maintaining repeatability and reproducibility of the test method results. These values given in parentheses are provided for information only and are not considered standard.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard10 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The significance of the information to be recorded in a test report allows for exoskeleton safety and performance to be contextualized with the exoskeleton user. Exoskeleton test results can be compared across users to determine exoskeleton usefulness, exoskeleton capability for particular users or groups of users, and standardized reporting of user information allows organizations to better replicate tests.
5.2 Limitations of the practice are that not all exoskeletons can or have the same fit to all users and therefore may change the exoskeleton capabilities. For example, as users vary in size, shape, gender, etc., an exoskeleton that fits one user may allow an increase or decrease in torque applied to the arms, legs, etc. as compared to another user, especially users at the upper and lower limits of manufacturer-suggested exoskeleton sizing. Another example is that prior surgeries or pain may affect measured exoskeleton performance as the user may, for example, favor use of one limb to another or may move different when tested with the exoskeleton versus without the exoskeleton.
5.3 Additional user measurement information may be found in the following references:
Note 1: The measurements in these references may not consider measurements of the user when dressed in appropriate clothing (for example, shoes – see 6.3.12 – 6.3.14) that will be worn when using an exoskeleton.
5.3.1 2012 Anthropometric Survey (ANSUR II6) of U.S. Army Personnel: Methods and Summary Statistics,
5.3.2 United States Air Force Research Laboratory Civilian American and European Surface Anthropometry Resource (CAESAR7) Final Report,
5.3.3 Tables D6240/D6240M,
5.3.4 Tables D8077/D8077M,
5.3.5 Tables D7878/D7878M,
5.3.6 Tables D6960/D6960M,
5.3.7 Terminology D5219,
5.3.8 Tables D8241/D8241M,
5.3.9 Practice E3003,
5.3.10 Practice F1731, and
5.3.11 ISO 7250-1.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes a means to record the exoskeleton user information when testing. The practice provides a method for recording exoskeleton user: general information, measurements, activity level, experience with exoskeletons, prior injuries, and other pertinent information that may impact exoskeleton testing.
1.2 This practice is intended to be used with other exoskeleton test methods and practices to provide a clear representation of the exoskeleton user being tested; provides a basis for comparison of the test circumstances across different exoskeletons, users, tests, or all three; and allows a test to be recreated.
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are not precise mathematical conversions to imperial units. They are close approximate equivalents for the purpose of specifying exoskeleton characteristics while maintaining repeatability and reproducibility of the test method results. These values given in parentheses are provided for information only and are not considered standard.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Obstacles can vary greatly in, for example: length, width, height, quantity, geometry, and for a variety of industries. Fig. 2 shows examples of various obstacles.
FIG. 2 Example Obstacles in: (a) Road Construction; (b) Warehouse; (c) Manufacturing: Floor; (d) Manufacturing: Overhead; (e) Military Obstacle Course
5.2 Exoskeletons are being used in the industrial/occupational, military, response, medical, and recreational sectors to enhance safety and effectiveness of the user to perform tasks. Many tasks involve avoiding obstacles, and may include for example, upper, lower, or full body movement in order to complete the task. As there are infinite obstacles and ways that obstacle courses can be designed, this test method addresses obstacle avoidance while walking through a standard set of obstacles. Dependent upon the task, it may require people to traverse various environmental conditions (for example, ground) and avoid obstacles while wearing an exoskeleton. For example, an exoskeleton may be used to help during construction or in medical facilities where workers in exoskeletons avoid obstacles with and without carrying loads as part of their daily activities. In military, manufacturing, and response areas, exoskeleton users may for example, step over or under, side-step between, or walk around obstacles, or combinations thereof, to perform the task at hand. Variations to obstacle avoidance may include, for example, increased user speed/momentum, load handling, and distractions that may change user performance when avoiding obstacles. The testing results of exoskeletons shall describe, in a statistically significant way (see guidance in Appendix X1), how reliably the exoskeleton is able to support tasks within the specified types of environments, confinements, and terrains, and thus provide sufficiently high levels of confidence to determine the applicability of the exoskeleton.
5.3 This test method addresses exoskeleton safety and performance require...
SCOPE
1.1 Purpose:
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of exoskeleton use test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate an exoskeleton’s (see Terminology F3323) safety (see 1.4) or performance, or both, when avoiding obstacles.
1.1.2 Exoskeletons shall possess a certain set of allowable exoskeleton user movement capabilities, including user-motion adaptability, to suit operations such as: industrial/occupational, military, response, medical, or recreational.
1.1.3 Environments in these typical sectors often pose constraints to exoskeleton user movement to various degrees. Being able to avoid obstacles while walking, as intended by the user or test requestor, while using an exoskeleton is essential for exoskeleton deployment for a variety of tasks (for example, ascending/descending stairs, crossing gaps and hurdles, balancing on a beam). This test method specifies test setup, procedure, and recording to standardize this obstacle avoidance task for testing exoskeleton user movement.
1.1.4 Exoskeletons need to function as intended, regardless of types of tasks and terrain complexities (for example, carpet, metal, masonry, rock, wood). Required movement capabilities may include, for example: walking, running, crawling, climbing; traversing gaps, hurdles, stairs, slopes; avoiding obstacles, on various types of floor surfaces or terrains, or within confined spaces, or combinations thereof. Standard test methods are required to evaluate whether or not exoskeletons meet these requirements while also allowing test repeatability.
1.1.5 ASTM Subcommittee F48.03 develops and maintains international standards for task performance and environmental considerations that include but are not limited to, standards for safety, quality, and efficiency. This subcommittee aims to develop standards for any exoskeleton application as exemplified as in 1.1.2. The F48.03 test suite consists of a set of test methods ...
- Standard15 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Exoskeletons are being used in the industrial/occupational, military, response, medical, and recreational sectors to enhance safety and effectiveness of the user to perform tasks. Traversing gaps is a component of many tasks that someone would do with an exoskeleton. For example, an exoskeleton may be used to help a worker in building construction where gaps in ground surfaces are prevalent. In the military, and other similar environments, soldiers using exoskeletons may traverse gaps along paths carrying loads. Fig. 1 shows examples of gaps typically found in various environments in which persons using exoskeletons may be required to step over gaps. The testing results of exoskeletons shall describe, in a statistically significant way, how reliably the exoskeleton is able to support tasks within the specified types of environments, confinements, and terrains, and thus provide sufficiently high levels of confidence to determine the applicability of the exoskeleton to a given task.
5.2 This test method addresses exoskeleton safety and performance requirements expressed by manufacturing, medical, emergency responders, military, or other organizations requesting this test. The safety and performance data captured within this test method are indicative of the test exoskeleton’s and the exoskeleton user’s capabilities. The safety and performance data from these tests are essential to guiding the procurement and deployment decisions of exoskeleton purchasers and users.
5.3 The standard test setup and apparatus (see Section 6) is specified to be easily fabricated. This facilitates evaluation and replication of gap tests by exoskeleton sectors. The standard test setup and apparatus can also be used to support training (see Practice F3444/F3444M) and to establish proficiency of exoskeleton users, as well as provide manufacturers with information about the usefulness of their exoskeleton(s) for tasks.
5.4 Although the test method was developed for the sectors lis...
SCOPE
1.1 Purpose:
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of exoskeleton use test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate an exoskeleton’s (see Terminology F3323) performance or safety, or both, of usage by the exoskeleton user (see 1.4) for gaps.
1.1.2 Exoskeletons shall possess a certain set of allowable exoskeleton user movement capabilities, including user-motion adaptability, to suit operations such as: industrial/occupational, military, response, medical, or recreational. Environments in these typical sectors often pose constraints to exoskeleton user movement to various degrees. Being able to step over gaps, as intended by the user or test requestor, while using an exoskeleton is essential for exoskeleton deployment for a variety of tasks. This test method specifies test setup, procedure, and recording to standardize this gaps task for testing exoskeleton user movement.
1.1.3 Exoskeletons need to function as intended, regardless of types of tasks and terrain complexities (for example, carpet, metal, masonry, rock, wood). Required movement capabilities may include, for example: walking, running, crawling, climbing; traversing gaps, stairs, slopes, various types of floor surfaces or terrains, or confined spaces, or combinations thereof. Standard test methods are required to evaluate whether or not exoskeletons meet these requirements.
1.1.4 ASTM Subcommittee F48.03 develops and maintains international standards for task performance and environmental considerations that include but are not limited to, standards for safety, quality, and efficiency. This subcommittee aims to develop standards for any exoskeleton application as exemplified as in 1.1.2. The F48.03 test suite consists of a set of test methods for evaluating exoskeleton capability requirements. This gaps test method is a part of the test suite. The setup, procedure, and apparatuses associated with the test methods challenge speci...
- Standard17 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Hurdle designs can vary greatly in, for example: hurdle geometry, surface coatings, and coverings for a variety of industries. Fig. 1 shows examples of various hurdles.
5.2 Exoskeletons are being used in the industrial/occupational, military, response, medical, and recreational sectors to enhance safety and effectiveness of the user to perform tasks. Hurdles are used in many tasks performed and may include, for example, upper, lower, or full body movement in order to complete the task. For example, an exoskeleton may be used to help rehabilitate a patient who suffered a traumatic injury. And in manufacturing, warehousing, and other occupations, and other similar environments, workers in exoskeletons may traverse hurdles (for example, obstacles) in the walkways while carrying or not carrying loads, indoors or outdoors, as part of their daily activities. The testing results of exoskeletons shall describe, in a statistically significant way, how reliably the exoskeleton is able to support tasks within the specified types of environments, confinements, and terrains, and thus provide sufficiently high levels of confidence to determine the applicability of the exoskeleton.
5.3 This test method addresses exoskeleton safety and performance requirements expressed by manufacturing, emergency responders, military, or other organizations requesting this test. The safety and performance data captured within this test method are indicative of the test exoskeleton’s and the exoskeleton user’s capabilities. Having available direct information from tested exoskeleton(s) with associated performance data to guide procurement and deployment decisions is essential to exoskeleton purchasers and users.
5.4 The testing results of the candidate exoskeleton(s) shall describe, in a statistically significant way, how reliably the exoskeleton user is able to negotiate hurdles. The test apparatus described in Section 6 is intended to be a single or set of hurdles where repeatable re...
SCOPE
1.1 Purpose:
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of exoskeleton use test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate an exoskeleton’s (see Terminology F3323) safety (see 1.4) or performance, or both, for traversing hurdles.
1.1.2 Exoskeletons possess a certain set of allowable exoskeleton user movement capabilities, including user-motion adaptability, to suit operations such as: industrial/occupational, military, response, medical, or recreational. Environments in these typical sectors often pose constraints to exoskeleton user movement to various degrees. Being able to traverse hurdles, as intended by the user or test requestor, while using an exoskeleton is essential for exoskeleton deployment for a variety of tasks (for example, traversing logs, objects). This test method specifies test setup, procedure, and recording to standardize this hurdles task for testing exoskeleton user movement.
1.1.3 Exoskeletons need to function as intended, regardless of types of tasks and terrain complexities (for example, carpet, metal, masonry, rock, wood). Required movement capabilities may include, for example: walking, running, crawling, climbing, traversing gaps, hurdles, stairs, slopes, various types of floor surfaces or terrains, or confined spaces, or any combination thereof. Standard test methods are required to evaluate whether or not exoskeletons meet these requirements.
1.1.4 ASTM Subcommittee F48.03 develops and maintains international standards for task performance and environmental considerations that include but are not limited to, standards for safety, quality, and efficiency. This subcommittee aims to develop standards for any exoskeleton application as exemplified as in 1.1.2. The F48.03 test suite consists of a set of test methods for evaluating exoskeleton capability requirements. This hurdles test method is a part of the test suite. The setup, procedure, and apparatuses associated wi...
- Standard15 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 There is strong evidence that exoskeletons can physically augment and assist users. They are typically designed and optimized with specific tasks in mind and initially tested in controlled lab or field settings. However, in the real world exoskeletons encounter less structured environments and situations (for example, hospital rooms, factory floors, construction sites, or even personal homes). In order to accelerate the adoption of exoskeletons in society, understanding their safety in the presence of perturbations is helpful. The testing results of the exoskeleton shall describe the extent to which the exoskeleton improves, inhibits, or maintains a user’s ability to recover from stumbles, thus providing exoskeleton wearers and prescribers (for example, patients, clinicians, industry leaders, factory workers) with additional information about device performance and expectations.
5.2 The standard test apparatus and setup (see Section 6) is specified to be easily fabricated and implemented in gait or motion analysis laboratories. Variants of the apparatus, control algorithm, and test setup are acceptable to allow implementation in various lab settings with ranging experimental capabilities. The standard test setup and apparatus can also be used to support training and establish proficiency of exoskeleton users, as well as provide manufacturers with information about the performance of their exoskeleton(s) for tasks.
SCOPE
1.1 Purpose:
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method is to evaluate the extent to which an exoskeleton (see Section 3) improves, inhibits, or maintains (that is, does not affect) a user’s ability to recover from a stumble perturbation.
1.1.2 Exoskeletons are designed to assist specific tasks and initially tested in controlled lab or controlled field settings. However, in the real world exoskeletons encounter less structured environments and situations (for example, hospital rooms, factory floors, construction sites). Even without exoskeletons people will stumble (that is, trip) or scuff their foot. It would be helpful to understand how wearing an exoskeleton affects a person’s ability to recover from a stumble perturbation. Is one’s ability to recover hampered, enhanced, or unaltered when using an exoskeleton? This test method specifies test setup, procedure, and recording to standardize testing exoskeleton user stumble recovery.
1.2 Performing Location—This test method shall be performed in a testing laboratory where the specified apparatus and environmental conditions are available and implemented.
1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are not precise mathematical conversions to inch-pound units. They are close approximate equivalents for the purpose of specifying material dimensions or quantities that are readily available to avoid excessive fabrication costs of test apparatuses while maintaining repeatability and reproducibility of the test method results. These values given in parentheses are provided for information only and are not considered standard.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard8 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This k-rail terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest to challenging (when the cross-over slope configuration is used) outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.
5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within traini...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of k-rails. This test method is one of several related Terrain tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (a.k.a. SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (a.k.a. Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.7 This international standard was developed in ...
- Standard12 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system maneuvering and remote operator proficiency. The align ground contacts with parallel rails test challenges robotic system locomotion, operator control, effective camera positioning, chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, the align ground contacts with parallel rails test can be used to represent situations where hazards must be avoided by the robot (for example, debris, puddles) surrounding a path in the environment, highlighting situational awareness demands on the operator while controlling the robot.
5.2 The scale of the apparatus can vary to provide different constraints representative of typical intended deployment environments. For example, the three configurations can be representative of repeatable complexity for unobstructed environments (open configuration), relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars (rectangular confinement configuration), or within bus, train, or plane aisles, or dwellings with hallways and doorways (square confinement configuration).
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. The parallel rails apparatus can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with ex...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to align its ground contacts while maneuvering across parallel rails. This test method is one of several related maneuvering tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of most functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. This test method can be used to evaluate assistive or autonomous behaviors intended to improve the effectiveness or efficiency of remotely operated systems.
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (a.k.a. SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (a.k.a. Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.7 This international standard was developed in acc...
- Standard12 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard12 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. The variable height rail obstacle challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, high-centering tendencies, self-righting (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, the variable height rail obstacle can be used to represent obstacles in the environment, such as railroad tracks, curbs, and debris.
5.2 The scale of the apparatus can vary to provide different constraints representative of typical obstacle spacing in the intended deployment environment. For example, the three configurations can be representative of repeatable complexity for unobstructed obstacles (open configuration), relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars (rectangular confinement configuration), or within bus, train, or plane aisles, or dwellings with hallways and doorways (square confinement configuration).
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. The variable height rail obstacle can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to negotiate an obstacle in the form of variable height rail. This test method is one of several related obstacle tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of most functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. This test method can be used to evaluate assistive or autonomous behaviors intended to improve the effectiveness or efficiency of remotely operated systems.
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (a.k.a. SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (a.k.a. Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance wit...
- Standard11 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard11 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document defines terms relevant to automatic end-effector exchange systems used as a part of robot systems in accordance with ISO 10218‑2.
- Standard19 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SCOPE
1.1 This terminology covers terms associated with exoskeletons and exosuits. By providing a common and consistent lexicon, the purpose of this terminology is to facilitate communication between individuals who may be involved in the research, design, deployment, and use of exoskeletons and exosuits in applications, including but not limited to industrial, military, emergency response, recreational, and medical areas.
1.2 For the terminology to be harmonious with the practices in the fields, definitions have been drawn from other standards, the literature, or other public sources when possible. When no definition is available, is similar but requires change for use within standards produced by Committee F48, or in dispute, a consensus-based approach will be used to resolve definitions and add them to the lexicon. The development of this terminology is taking place in close coordination with corresponding efforts in all Committee F48 subcommittees to ensure comprehensive and consistent coverage.
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard3 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard3 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document defines terms used in relation to robotics.
- Standard22 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard23 pagesFrench languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Development of exoskeleton technologies requires careful analysis of potential risks that may be associated with their use. Failure to adequately assess risks may give rise to hazardous situations at many instances of exoskeleton use, for example during completion of human trials, during exoskeleton demonstrations in trade shows, as well as during exoskeleton training, wear, operation, transportation, maintenance, and disposal.
4.2 This guide provides a minimum set of hazards that should be considered by producers when analyzing and mitigating risks related to exoskeletons. This set of hazards should be supplemented with other hazards that may reflect unique safety concerns relevant to the exoskeleton technology and application. The following sources may provide additional insight based on exoskeleton technology and application:
4.2.1 IEC 60601 series;
4.2.2 IEC 80601-2-78;
4.2.3 ISO/DIS 13482;
4.2.4 Product standards established by military agencies (examples are NATO standards and United States Military Standards).
4.3 For each listed hazard, one example of harm scenario and examples of possible harm are provided. These examples are used to illustrate potential safety consequences related to such hazards. They do not reflect a comprehensive list of all possible acute or chronic injuries that may result from exoskeleton use. Additionally, although this guide does not address hazards that may result in damage of objects, these should be considered as well during the risk analysis process.
4.4 This guide does not provide detailed guidance for application of risk management processes to exoskeletons. However, the producer should use a structured approach to identify and monitor hazards, and mitigate related risks throughout the exoskeleton life-cycle. Additional guidance on risk management can be found in the following standards:
4.4.1 ISO 31000;
4.4.2 ISO 14971.
4.5 This guide does not supersede any established laws or regulations ...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide lists typical hazards that should be considered by exoskeleton producers when analyzing and managing potential risks related to exoskeletons.
1.2 Where possible, this guide provides references to agency standards, regulations, or guidelines for assessment of risks related to these hazards and for application of risk reduction measures.
1.3 This guide applies to all exoskeleton types, regardless of the applications of the technology such as consumer, industrial, medical, military, and emergency management services.
1.4 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Guide11 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Exoskeletons are being used in the industrial/occupational, military, response, medical, and recreational sectors to enhance safety and effectiveness of the user to perform tasks. Gait is a component of many tasks that someone would do with an exoskeleton. For example, an exoskeleton may be used to help rehabilitate a patient who suffered a traumatic leg injury. In manufacturing, warehousing, military, and other similar environments, workers and soldiers in exoskeletons walk with and without carrying loads, many times over long distances, indoors or outdoors, as part of their daily activities. Fig. 1 shows examples of exoskeleton users walking, which, depending upon the task, may require people to traverse various ground surfaces while wearing an exoskeleton. The testing results of exoskeletons shall describe, in a statistically significant way, how reliably the exoskeleton is able to support tasks within the specified types of environments, confinements, and terrains, and thus provide sufficiently high levels of confidence to determine the applicability of the exoskeleton to a given task.
FIG. 1 Examples of Exoskeleton Users Walking in Various Sectors
Note 1: Examples include: (a) medical rehabilitation (courtesy Gogoa), (b) military material handling (courtesy Mawashi), (c) military soldiering (courtesy Mawashi), (d) recreational hiking through snow and (e) walking on pavement as part of daily work duties (courtesy Humotech), and (f) industrial worker standing up from a chair prior to walking (courtesy SuitX).
5.2 This test method addresses exoskeleton safety and performance requirements expressed by manufacturing, emergency responders, military, or other organizations requesting this test. The safety and performance data captured within this test method are indicative of the test exoskeleton’s and the exoskeleton user’s capabilities. Having available direct information from tested exoskeleton(s) with associated performance data to guide procurement and...
SCOPE
1.1 Purpose:
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of exoskeleton use test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate an exoskeleton’s (see Terminology F3323) safety (see 1.4) or performance, or both, for gait.
1.1.2 Exoskeletons shall possess a certain set of allowable exoskeleton user movement capabilities, including user-motion adaptability, to suit operations such as: industrial/occupational, military, response, medical or recreational. Environments in these typical sectors often pose constraints to exoskeleton user movement to various degrees. Being able to walk, as intended by the user or test requestor, while using an exoskeleton is essential for exoskeleton deployment for a variety of tasks. This test method specifies test setup, procedure, and recording to standardize this gait task for testing exoskeleton user movement.
1.1.3 Exoskeletons shall be able to handle many types of task and terrain complexities. The required movement capabilities include, for example: walking, running, crawling, climbing, traversing gaps, hurdles, stairs, slopes, various types of floor surfaces or terrains, and confined spaces. Standard test methods are required to evaluate whether or not exoskeletons meet these requirements.
1.1.4 ASTM Subcommittee F48.03 develops and maintains international standards for task performance and environmental considerations that include but are not limited to, standards for safety, quality, and efficiency. This subcommittee aims to develop standards for any exoskeleton application, as exemplified as in 1.1.2. The F48.03 test suite consists of a set of test methods for evaluating exoskeleton capability requirements. This gait test method is a part of the test suite. The setup, procedure, and apparatuses associated with the test methods challenge specific exoskeleton capabilities in repeatable ways to facilitate comparison of different exoskeleton models or exoskeleton capa...
- Standard15 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 There is evidence to support use of occupational exoskeletons to support work tasks and activities. It is recognized that organizations, job responsibilities, and working contexts vary widely. Additionally, a wide array of exoskeletons are becoming available on the market. Exoskeletons vary in terms of complexity, form and mass, body coverage, and function. Certification programs for occupational exoskeletons are not available at this time. As such, at the present time no mechanisms exist to guarantee that circumstantial risk evaluation was performed on exoskeletons or whether these evaluations reflect the real working context in which exoskeletons will be implemented.
4.2 This guide provides a minimum baseline for assessing risks that may arise from exoskeleton interaction with existing and task-specific environments. The working document presented in Appendix X1 can be used to support decision making at different stages of exoskeleton implementation, such as:
4.2.1 Purchase—It can highlight safety concerns that may arise from introduction of a given exoskeleton technology in a specific work context;
4.2.2 Implementation of Risk Reduction Measures—It can highlight residual risks that require risk reduction measures;
4.2.3 Detection of Unknowns—It can lead to definition of additional steps that are needed to satisfy risk assessment for potentially hazardous situations;
4.2.4 Risk Monitoring—It can be used as a “living document” to monitor residual risks throughout the use period of the exoskeleton.
4.3 Harm scenarios described in this guide primarily reflect situations that may result in acute and observable injury or harm to a person. This guide is not suited for assessment of potential exoskeleton-to-task incompatibilities that may result in chronic, cumulative, or long-term injuries. However, these should be considered as part of any exoskeleton selection and implementation process. Guidelines on evaluation of risk factors that may lead to ...
SCOPE
1.1 When implementing exoskeletons in real-world work environments, exoskeleton interaction with various components of a given task and its environment can generate a number of risks. This guide provides guidance for conducting contextual risk assessment. A working document is provided in Appendix X1 to allow initiation of the risk assessment process. It can be used to describe tasks, break the tasks down into task elements, anticipate related harm scenarios (a series of typical harm scenarios are provided), assess related risks, and detect scenarios that may require further analysis or implementation of risk reduction measures.
1.2 This guide applies to exoskeletons administered by employers to paid workers or professionals to support work-related tasks and activities.
1.3 This guide addresses risks that may result in acute and observable injury and harm. This guide does not address the following topics and concerns related to exoskeleton use:
1.3.1 Assessment and prevention of risk factors that can lead to chronic, cumulative, or long-term injuries;
1.3.2 Use of exoskeletons to support rehabilitation and return to work;
1.3.3 Risks related to storage and use of personal information;
1.3.4 Risks that may result in damage of objects; and
1.3.5 Financial risks.
1.4 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International St...
- Guide26 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document describes methods of specifying and evaluating the performance of lower-back support robots. This document applies regardless of the purpose and application of lower-back support robots and the driving methods (e.g. electric, hydraulic and pneumatic). This document does not apply to medical robots, although the test methods specified in this document can be utilized for medical robots. This document is not intended for the verification or validation of safety requirements.
- Standard29 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
3.1 This guide describes a template of written considerations that should be provided by the manufacturer to the purchaser related to the documenting of exoskeleton analysis. Adherence to this guide allows analysis results of varied exoskeleton manufacturers to be compared by a purchaser with respect to their end user needs.
3.2 Not every element of this guide may be applicable to all exoskeleton components or configurations. It is the manufacturer’s responsibility to determine which portions of this guide are applicable to their exoskeletons for analysis reporting.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide provides a structure for exoskeleton manufacturers to document their analysis. Furthermore, this guide should be used in conjunction with Practice F3474, Guide F3518, Standard Guide for The Application of Ergonomics to Prevent Injury During Exoskeleton Use2 and other future documents.
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.3 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Guide3 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document describes methods of specifying and evaluating the manipulation performance of service robots, notably: - grasp size; - grasp strength; - grasp slip resistance; - opening a hinged door; and - opening a sliding door. There are other grasping characteristics and use cases for manipulation of service robots. It is expected that these will be included in a future revision. This document deals with the indoor environment only. However, the depicted tests can also be applicable for robots operating in outdoor environments. This document is not applicable for the verification or validation of safety requirements.
- Standard14 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. The variable hurdle obstacle as described challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, the variable hurdle obstacle can be used to represent obstacles in the environment, such as railroad tracks, curbs, and debris.
5.2 The scale of the apparatus can vary to provide different constraints representative of typical obstacle spacing in the intended deployment environment. For example, the three configurations can be representative of repeatable complexity for unobstructed obstacles (open configuration), relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars (rectangular confinement configuration), or within bus, train, or plane aisles, or dwellings with hallways and doorways (square confinement configuration).
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. The variable hurdle obstacle can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repea...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to negotiate an obstacle in the form of hurdles. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of most functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. This test method can be used to evaluate assistive or autonomous behaviors intended to improve the effectiveness or efficiency of remotely operated systems.
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (a.k.a. SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (a.k.a. Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internation...
- Standard12 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document presents requirements and guidelines on the specification of modular frameworks, on open modular design and on the integration of modules for realising service robots in various environments, including personal and professional sectors. The document is targeted at the following user groups: - modular service robot framework developers who specify performance frameworks in an unambiguous way; - module designers and/or manufacturers who supply end users or robot integrators; - service robot integrators who choose applicable modules for building a modular system. This document includes guidelines on how to apply existing safety and security standards to service robot modules. This document is not a safety standard. This document applies specifically to service robots, although the modularity principles presented in this document can be utilized by framework developers, module manufacturers, and module integrators from other fields not necessarily restricted to robotics.
- Standard69 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related tests that provide reproducible measures of radio communications for remotely operated robots. It measures the maximum line-of-sight radio communications range between a robot and its remote operator interface using omnidirectional robot maneuvering and visual acuity tasks to evaluate the degradation of essential mission capabilities due to communications latency and loss.
5.2 This test method is inexpensive, easy to fabricate, and simple to conduct so it can be replicated widely. This enables comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class system capabilities and remote operator proficiency.
5.3 Evaluations—This test method can be conducted in a controlled environment with no radio frequency interference and minimal radio propagation effects to measure baseline capabilities that can be compared widely across robotic systems. It also can be embedded into any operational training scenario as a practical measure of line-of-sight radio communications range with additional degradation due to uncontrolled variables such as radio frequency interference, weather, etc. The results of these scenario tests can be compared across robotic systems only when conducted in the same environment in similar conditions. However, the results cannot be compared reliably to results from other venues or environmental conditions due to the uncontrolled variables.
5.4 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.
5.5 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. Operators can learn system behaviors during radio communication degradation and refine techniques to mit...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots using radio communications to transmit real-time data between a robot and its remote operator interface. This test method measures the maximum line-of-sight radio communications distance at which a robot can maintain omnidirectional steering, speed control, precise stopping, visual acuity, and other functionality. This test method is one of several related radio communication tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.
1.2 A remote operator is in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors may improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system.
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method to address various mission requirements.
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.
1.5 The International System of Units (a.k.a. SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (a.k.a. Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable the use of readily available materials in different countries. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.7 This international standard was developed in ...
- Standard12 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard12 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 A main purpose of using robots in emergency response operations is to enhance the safety and effectiveness of emergency responders operating in hazardous or inaccessible environments. The testing results of the candidate robot shall describe, in a statistically significant way, how reliably the robot is able to perform the specified types of tasks and thus provide emergency responders sufficiently high levels of confidence to determine the applicability of the robot.
5.2 This test method addresses robot performance requirements expressed by emergency responders and representatives from other interested organizations. The performance data captured within this test method are indicative of the testing robot’s capabilities. Having available a roster of successfully tested robots with associated capabilities data to guide procurement and deployment decisions for emergency responders is consistent with the guideline of “Governments at all levels have a responsibility to develop detailed, robust, all-hazards response plans” as stated in National Response Framework.
5.3 This test method is part of a test suite and is intended to provide a capability baseline for the robotic communications systems based on the identified needs of the emergency response community. Adequate testing performance will not ensure successful operation in all emergency response environments due to possible extreme communications difficulties. Rather, this standard is intended to provide a common comparison that can aid in choosing appropriate systems. This standard is also intended to encourage development of improved and innovative communications systems for use on emergency response robots.
5.4 The standard apparatus is specified to be easily fabricated to facilitate self-evaluation by robot developers and provide practice tasks for emergency responders to exercise robot actuators, sensors, and operator interfaces. The standard apparatus can also be used to support operator training ...
SCOPE
1.1 Purpose:
1.1.1 The purpose of this test method, as a part of a suite of radio communication test methods, is to quantitatively evaluate a teleoperated robot’s (see Terminology E2521) capability to perform maneuvering and inspection tasks in a non-line-of-sight environment.
1.1.2 Robots shall possess a certain set of radio communication capabilities, including performing maneuvering and inspection tasks in a non-line-of-sight environment, to suit critical operations for emergency responses. The capability for a robot to perform these types of tasks in obstructed areas down range is critical for emergency response operations. This test method specifies a standard set of apparatuses, procedures, and metrics to evaluate the robot/operator capabilities for performing these tasks.
1.1.3 Emergency response robots shall be able to operate remotely using the equipped radios in line-of-sight environments, in non-line-of-sight environments, and for signal penetration through such impediments as buildings, rubbles, and tunnels. Additional capabilities include operating in the presence of electromagnetic interference and providing link security and data logging. Standard test methods are required to evaluate whether candidate robots meet these requirements.
1.1.4 ASTM E54.08.01 Task Group on Robotics specifies a radio communication test suite, which consists of a set of test methods for evaluating these communication capabilities. This non-line-of-sight range test method is a part of the radio communication test suite. The apparatuses associated with the test methods challenge specific robot capabilities in repeatable ways to facilitate comparison of different robot models as well as particular configurations of similar robot models.
1.1.5 This test method establishes procedures, apparatuses, and metrics for specifying and testing the capability of radio (wireless) links used between the operator station and the t...
- Standard11 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
2.1 This practice describes what measure should be performed during the near (hours/days), mid (days/weeks), and far (months/years) stages of exoskeleton evaluation (Fig. 1). The functional conditions and metrics with respect to each task method are assessed from the body area(s) impacted by the exoskeleton (for example, upper body, lower body, or both). These may be within as well as distant to the body areas impacted by the exoskeleton (for example, an upper body exoskeleton may have impacts on the trunk and spine). Desired effects as well as unintended encumbrances to the user’s body are important considerations. The evaluation will occur within the context relevant to the end-use application of the exoskeleton’s implementation. This practice pertains to the industry, military, medical, first responders, and recreational domains, but other domains may arise in the future and will need to be considered. Each domain is unique unto itself; however, the task methods and metrics collected may be unique or overlap across any number of user domains.
FIG. 1 Exoskeleton Assessment Decision Tree
2.2 Task methods and their metrics are either administered in a laboratory environment, field environment, or both laboratory and field environments. Where not otherwise specified, patient functional outcome measures and pain are key metrics that should be considered for testing performed in the medical domain. Exoskeleton producers or researchers, or both, may also want to consider different types of imaging such as X-rays, computed tomography (CT) scans, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound, and nuclear medicine imaging. Additionally, exoskeleton producers or researchers, or both, may also wish to carry out neuroimaging such as, but not limited to, structural and functional and diffusion MRI, magnetoencephalography (MEG), electroencephalography (EEG), positron emission tomography (PET), or near infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) to understand the cognitive and neurophysiol...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice provides a recommended approach and a set of options for assessing one or more specific ergonomic parameters with respect to human users of exoskeletons.
1.2 This practice provides functional ergonomic criteria to consider for the design, production, and evaluation of exoskeletons within the domains of industry, military, medical, first responders, and recreational. When designing exoskeletons, natural unassisted human kinematics and kinetics, as well as the resulting strain and fatigue experienced by the user should be salient design parameters. Any changes in the natural unassisted human kinematics and kinetics may impact the exoskeleton’s effectiveness in augmenting user performance. Therefore, the defining principle of this practice is to establish objective measures that can be selected from to assess human kinematics and kinetics, as well as the resulting strain and fatigue experienced by the user within the task context of the exoskeleton’s end use application.
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard14 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This practice contains the recommendations for minimal informational requirements for the identification of exoskeletons. It is intended to provide the user with some of the basic information necessary for the selection and use of the exoskeletons.
4.2 Additional information beyond the content recommended by this practice is permitted to be applied to the label.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice sets forth labeling and instruction guidelines for manufacturers of exoskeletons.
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to inch-pound units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard2 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard2 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This practice describes the minimum information to be provided by the manufacturer to the end user related to the wearing, care, and maintenance of an exoskeleton. Adherence to this practice allows written information to be provided with the exoskeleton to purchasers.
4.2 Not every element of this practice may be applicable to all exoskeleton components or configurations. It is the manufacturer’s responsibility to determine which portions of this practice, and the corresponding requirements, are applicable to their exoskeletons. For informational requirements that are not applicable because of the nature of the product and intended use, the manufacturer shall indicate and describe those portions or requirements that are not applicable.
4.3 All information related to wearing, decontamination, care, and maintenance shall be written in a manner so that the end user can readily understand the details. To emphasize important limitations, bold lettering and explicit warning terminology (for example, signal words such as ‘danger,’ ‘warning,’ and ‘caution’ (described in ANSI Z535.4)) shall be used. Where possible, pictograms and illustrations may be used to convey specific instructions. In addition, the use of symbols, such as those provided in the care of textile products in Guide D5489, are appropriate for indicating specific care procedures used in cleaning an exoskeleton where applicable.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes the required minimum information to be conveyed by the manufacturers to buyers or end users for the wearing, care, and maintenance of exoskeletons.
1.1.1 This practice does not cover specific instructions for how to select and when to use exoskeletons or design requirements.
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.3 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard3 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard3 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This practice establishes the minimum training criteria for exoskeleton users.
4.2 This practice does not supersede any established laws or regulations of international, national, federal, state, tribal, local, or regional governments.
4.3 A commonly used training practice is for a competent, qualified, or certified trainer to provide to the student with written, visual, and verbal training materials that elementally breakdown the intended subject matter into a series of achievable modules. The trainer describes and demonstrates each module, and then interactively has the exoskeleton student user repeat and demonstrate specified knowledge, skills, and abilities to verify and validate the complete transfer of that knowledge, skills, and abilities.
4.4 This practice by itself is not a training document. It is an outline of the topics required for training or evaluating exoskeleton users for competence, proficiency, certification, or license.
4.5 The knowledge, skills, and abilities presented in the following sections are not in any particular order and do not represent a training sequence.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice establishes the minimum training requirements, including general knowledge, skills, and abilities, for personnel who use an exoskeleton as part of their duties.
1.2 This practice applies only to exoskeletons and exosuits.
Note 1: For more advanced exoskeletons, those that are powered, or with IT data connections/links for data transfer, or combinations thereof, upload/download requirements, ensure exoskeleton user and system operators training includes addressing all precautions so they can quickly identify and resolve any data transfer problems experienced with a fully operational exoskeleton.
1.3 It is recognized that organizations and job responsibilities vary widely among military, medical, industrial, and emergency response communities. It is the responsibility of the user of this practice to identify the appropriate subject matter for its program and its specific needs.
1.4 Users of this practice should consult with the exoskeleton manufacturer to ensure they have the latest and most relevant information on the exoskeleton. In addition, all training should comply with laws and regulations regarding user safety and health as well as the safety of individuals in close proximity to the user.
1.5 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- Standard3 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This crossing (discontinuous) pitch/roll ramp terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.
5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting mea...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of crossing (discontinuous) pitch/roll ramps. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.7 This international stand...
- Standard10 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard10 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This continuous pitch/roll ramp terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.
5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting measures of remot...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of continuous pitch/roll ramps. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.7 This international standard was develo...
- Standard10 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard10 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This section provides a description of the environmental conditions listed in Section 1 and describes the sub-conditions within each condition. Examples provided for many of the conditions and sub-conditions are provided as guidance only. Each of the conditions described should be evaluated and documented as set forth in Sections 5 – 7.
4.2 Environment Consistency: Static, Dynamic, Transitional
4.2.1 Static is when the environment is similar throughout the test apparatus. For example, there are minor fluctuations in temperature throughout the apparatus as shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2. Dynamic is when the environment significantly differs within the test apparatus. For example, when the temperature changes between repetitions as shown in Fig. 3. Transitional is when the environment significantly differs in different areas within the test apparatus as shown in Fig. 4. The intent here is to not give specific guidance, but to provide a high-level classification of a particular set of environmental conditions. If environment consistency is dynamic or transitional, or both, a report form (see Section 7) for each unique set of environmental conditions should be completed.
FIG. 1 Example of Static Environment Using Temperature
FIG. 2 Example of Static Environment Using Temperature and Showing a Transition Between Two Static Environments
FIG. 3 Example of Dynamic Environment Using Temperature and Showing that the Environment Changed During the Test
FIG. 4 Example of Transitional Environment Using Temperature Portions of the Environment may Remain Static or may be Dynamic (For example, Cold to Colder)
4.3 Floor or Ground Surface:
4.3.1 Exoskeleton mobility is affected by ground surface conditions including: surface texture/roughness, deformability, slope or lack of flatness (that is, undulation). Ground surface conditions can affect the exoskeleton: traction, vibration affecting the electronics integrity, positioning, and stability.
4.3.2 Type(s): ...
SCOPE
1.1 When conducting test methods, it is important to consider the role that the environmental conditions play in measurement of exoskeleton safety and performance. Exoskeletons are designed to be operated both indoors and outdoors under conditions specified by the manufacturer. Likewise, end users of the exoskeletons will be using these exoskeletons in a variety of environmental conditions. When conducting and replicating ASTM Committee F48 test methods by exoskeleton manufacturers and users, it is important to specify and document the environmental conditions under which the exoskeleton is to be tested as there will be variations in system performance caused by the conditions, especially when comparing and replicating sets of test results. It is also important to consider changes in environmental conditions during the course of operations (for example, transitions between conditions). As such, environmental conditions specified in this document are static, dynamic, or transitional, or combinations thereof; with the exoskeleton stationary or in motion. This document provides brief introduction to the following list of environmental conditions that can affect performance of the exoskeleton:
1.1.1 Floor or ground surface;
1.1.2 Temperature;
1.1.3 Humidity;
1.1.4 Atmospheric pressure;
1.1.5 Lighting;
1.1.6 Air flow and quality;
1.1.7 External sensor emission;
1.1.8 Electrical interference;
1.1.9 Boundaries;
1.1.10 Additional categories, for example underwater, extraterrestrial, may also be added to this standard as the exoskeleton industry applications evolve in these areas.
1.1.11 This document then breaks down each condition into sub-categories so that the user can document the various aspects associated with the category prior to exoskeleton tests defined in ASTM Committee F48 test methods listed in Section 2. It is recommended that salient environment conditions be documented when conduc...
- Standard18 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is part of an overall suite of related test methods that provide repeatable measures of robotic system mobility and remote operator proficiency. This symmetric stepfield terrain specifically challenges robotic system locomotion, suspension systems to maintain traction, rollover tendencies, self-righting in complex terrain (if necessary), chassis shape variability (if available), and remote situational awareness by the operator. As such, it can be used to represent modest outdoor terrain complexity or indoor debris within confined areas.
5.2 The overall size of the terrain apparatus can vary to provide different constraints depending on the typical obstacle spacing of the intended deployment environment. For example, the terrain with containment walls can be sized to represent repeatable complexity within bus, train, or plane aisles; dwellings with hallways and doorways; relatively open parking lots with spaces between cars; or unobstructed terrains.
5.3 The test apparatuses are low cost and easy to fabricate so they can be widely replicated. The procedure is also simple to conduct. This eases comparisons across various testing locations and dates to determine best-in-class systems and operators.
5.4 Evaluation—This test method can be used in a controlled environment to measure baseline capabilities. It can also be embedded into operational training scenarios to measure degradation due to uncontrolled variables in lighting, weather, radio communications, GPS accuracy, etc.
5.5 Procurement—This test method can be used to identify inherent capability trade-offs in systems, make informed purchasing decisions, and verify performance during acceptance testing. This aligns requirement specifications and user expectations with existing capability limits.
5.6 Training—This test method can be used to focus operator training as a repeatable practice task or as an embedded task within training scenarios. The resulting measures of remote opera...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method is intended for remotely operated ground robots operating in complex, unstructured, and often hazardous environments. It specifies the apparatuses, procedures, and performance metrics necessary to measure the capability of a robot to traverse complex terrains in the form of symmetric stepfields. This test method is one of several related mobility tests that can be used to evaluate overall system capabilities.
1.2 The robotic system includes a remote operator in control of all functionality, so an onboard camera and remote operator display are typically required. Assistive features or autonomous behaviors that improve the effectiveness or efficiency of the overall system are encouraged.
1.3 Different user communities can set their own thresholds of acceptable performance within this test method for various mission requirements.
1.4 Performing Location—This test method may be performed anywhere the specified apparatuses and environmental conditions can be implemented.
1.5 Units—The International System of Units (SI Units) and U.S. Customary Units (Imperial Units) are used throughout this document. They are not mathematical conversions. Rather, they are approximate equivalents in each system of units to enable use of readily available materials in different countries. This avoids excessive purchasing and fabrication costs. The differences between the stated dimensions in each system of units are insignificant for the purposes of comparing test method results, so each system of units is separately considered standard within this test method.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.7 This international standard was developed in ...
- Standard11 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
- Standard11 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off
This document describes methods that can be used to test personal care robots in terms of safety requirements defined in ISO 13482. The target robots of this document are identical to those of ISO 13482. The manufacturer determines the required tests and appropriate testing parameters based on a risk assessment of the robot's design and usage. This risk assessment can determine that tests and test parameters other than those contained in this document are acceptable. Not all test methods are applicable to all robot types. Test methods labelled "universal" are applicable to all personal care robots. For other tests, the heading states for which robot types the test can be applied (e.g. "for wearable robot" or "for mobile robot"). Some test methods can be replaced by using other applicable standards, even if they are not listed in this document.
- Technical report79 pagesEnglish languagesale 15% off