Assessment of risks related to employee-cobot ... - EUROSHNET
Transcript of Assessment of risks related to employee-cobot ... - EUROSHNET
Institute of Occupational Health, Safety and Ergonomics (ASER e.V.)
Corneliusstraße 31, 42329 Wuppertal, Germany
Assessment of risks related to
employee-cobot interaction
June 13th 2019
Dipl.-Ing. Christoph Mühlemeyer, M.Sc.
Institut ASER e.V. & GEWITEB mbH, Wuppertal
Internet & Further Information / Tools: www.institut-aser.de
EUROSHNET Conference 2019 12-14 June 2019 Dresden, Germany
Be smart, stay safe together - innovative products and workplaces
Agenda
1. Introduction
2. Methods
3. Results
4. Discussion
2
Institute of Occupational Health, Safety and Ergonomics (ASER e.V.)
Our Location in Wuppertal (NRW), Germany
3
Institute of Occupational Health, Safety and Ergonomics (ASER e.V.)
Our ongoing topics
4
ASERASER
Arbeitswissenschaftliche Bewertung von
Belastungs- und Beanspruchungsgrößen
(nach ASER , 1981)*ABB_0035b.CDR
sehr wahrscheinlich
wahrscheinlich
möglich
Grenzbereich (DLG)
belastend bzw.beanspruchend
gering belastend bzw.gering beanspruchend
sehr gering belastend bzw.sehr gering beanspruchend
Über-belastung
bzw.
Überbe-
anspruchung
VII
VI
V
IV
III
II
I
[m] > 420
[w] > 280
> 380 420£
> 250 280£
> 330 380£
> 220 250£
> 270 330£
> 180 220£
> 200 270£
> 130 180£
> 130 200£
> 80 130£
[m] £ 130
[w] £ 80
Eeff > 300
260 < Eeff 300£
220 < Eeff 260£
160 < Eeff 220£
95 < Eeff 160£
35 < Eeff 95£
Eeff 35£
Lr > 95
90 < Lr 95£
85 < Lr 90£
80 < Lr 85£
75 < Lr 80£
65 < Lr 75£
Lr 65£
AP > 52
48 < AP 52£
42 < AP 48£
34 < AP 42£
26 < AP 34£
17 < AP 26£
AP 17£
I II III V VIIVI
Belastungsintensität bzw.
Beanspruchungsintensität
Lärm-Beurtei-
lungspegel
Arbeitspuls-
frequenz
Lr [dB (A)] AP [1/min]AU [W] NET [°C]
Arbeitsenergie-
umsatz
Normal-
Effektivtemperatur
Eeff [W/m²]
Effektive
Bestrahlungsstärke
Akzeptanzschwelle
Toleranzschwelle
Arbeitsenergieumsatz-
Bewertungstufe
IV
40
37
33
31
25
19
36
33
31
29
22
17
33
29
27
25
19
15
30
26
23
21
16
13
28
23
19
17
14
11
26
21
15
13
11
9
25
19
11
9
8
7
* Müller, B.H.; Th. Hettinger (1981):
Hettinger, Th.; B.H. Müller, H. Peters (1981):
Müller, B.H.(1982):
Interpretations- und Bewertungsverfahren arbeitswissenschaftlich-ergonomischer Felddaten. Zeitschrift für Arbeitswissenschaft, 35 (1981), Heft 1981/2, S. 82 ff.
Hitzearbeit – Untersuchung an ausgewählten Arbeitsplätzen der Eisen- und Stahlindustrie. Forschungsbericht, Teil 1, Wuppertal, 1981
Synthetische Arbeitsplätze – Verfahren zur Entwicklung von arbeitsplatz- typischen Belastungs-Beanspruchungs-Profilen. Diss., Wuppertal, 1982
Klima am Arbeitsplatz und in der Arbeitsumgebung; Beurteilung des Klimas im Erträglichkeitsbereich.
Ergonomie - Bestandteil der Sicherheitswissenschaft. REFA, Berlin, 1989
Übersichtstabellen zur Belastungssituation am Arbeitsplatz. Fa 23 Bd. I Grundlagen und Methoden. Bd. II Eisen- und Stahlindustrie. BAU, Dortmund, 1990
* s.a. DIN 33403-3 (1988-06):
Müller, B.H. (1989):
Müller, B.H.; H. Peters, Th. Hettinger (1990):
EF 5095
Be
we
rtu
ng
s-
stu
fe
Research Methods
Measuring Devices
Development
Worldwide Instrument Implementation
& Ergonomics Trainings
Core Question & Classification
5
Aspect Specification
workplace area shopfloor / logistics
workplace status existing / already implemented
industry 4.0 type inherently safe cobot
impact type
safe product safe use (accidents)
guarantees a healthy use (short, mid &
long-term health effects)?
Do safe innovations
lead to healthy workplaces?
What has been studied
for this purpose?
Sawyer Cobot
6
Source: rethinkrobotics
Cobot-Interaction in Logistics
7
Sawyer
Lightweight Robot
1 jointed-arm
Display with
stylized eyes
Implementation:
Industrial Hall (Logistics)
Re-packaging of tubes on the assembly line
Shift system: 3 x 8h
Source: www.humarobotics.com
Agenda
1. Introduction
2. Methods
3. Results
4. Discussion
8
BDS-Instrument – Holistic Approach
Results & Modular System
BDS = Multilingual Instrument for Production Ergonomics, Risk Assessment with Expert Functions
Thematic BDS-Modules for Holistic Approach
Environmental
Conditions
Mental
Exposures
Physical
Exposures
PPE
Risk
Assessment
Maternity
Protection
Occupational
Health Care
Collective Bargaining
Agreement
Results & Expert BDS-Functions for Industrial Engineering & Ergonomists
Assessment
Profiles
Ideas for Improvement &
Simulation
Statistics, KPIs, Reports,
Expert Analysis, cadasters
Measures incl.
effectiveness check
BDS-Instrument
Focus of use for current study
BDS-Instrument’s Production Ergonomic Module was used to
check, if the cobot guarantees a healthy use
Main focus were the Physical Exposures & Mental Exposures
BDS-Instrument’s Simulation Functions were used to compare
the initial situation (human only) with the employee-cobot
interaction
BDS-Instrument – Basic Methodical Background
11
more red bars
=
more fatigue, more recovery time,
more complaints, more discomfort,
more disorders
=
more urgent need for action!
Task 1
Task 2
Task nTask name
Task pic
Workplace
Workplace name
Agenda
1. Introduction
2. Methods
3. Results
4. Discussion
12
employee (backward simulation)
13
Permanent trunk torsion > 10° (left/right)
54.000 hand movements for both hands
in total / shift
7 hours continuous static standing
…
50,3
Physical exposures
BDS Assessment level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
employee-cobot interaction
14
+
53,6
Physical exposures
BDS Assessment level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Changes:
+ 2.500 movements per hand
per shift
7% KIM MHO rating points
increase to 53,6 rating points
(KIM level 4)
employee (backward simulation)
15
7 sec cycle time
only displacing tasks, no rotation
cycle dependend w/o buffer
…
Mental exposures
BDS Assessment level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
employee-cobot interaction
16
Changes:
Reduction to 5 secs cycle time
Higher connection to the technical
process & fewer degrees of freedom
Substitution only after consultation
and after large delay
Less contact possibilities to other
colleagues, …
+
Mental exposures
BDS Assessment level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
BDS-Instrument – Production Ergonomics
Results, KPIs & Reports
17
Workplace
BDS Results, KPIs & Reports
w/o
cobot
cobot-
interaction
KIM-MHO result (risk score) 50,3 53,6
Physical Overload factor / employee (BDS report) 6 6
Cycle time (duration) 7s 5s
Repetition of work tasks (BAB level) 7 7
Connection to the technical process (BAB level) 4 (5) 6 (7)
Age stability (BDS KPI) no no
Mental Overload factor / employee (BDS report) 6 7
MSD risk (AMR 13.2 criteria) yes yes
Ordinance on Occupational Health Care – Sect. 5 optional optional
Irresponsible Risk (§9 MuSchG criteria) yes yes
Production Ergonomics Rank 1 of 2 2 of 2
Generally recommended for shopfloor no no
Agenda
1. Introduction
2. Methods
3. Results
4. Discussion
18
Discussion
19
Cobot-implementation increased upper extremity risk
(hand-/arm-injuries, CTS, ...) necessary surgeries increase!
New inherently safe technology can worsen exposures!
no cobot-manufactor problem, but an end-user problem
Cobots ≠ Manipulators (LHC success) in terms of ergonomics
method/process training for industrial engineering
Improvement Implementation gets more & more complicated
extended improvement management required Methods
Always the same: Worldwide approaches & limits, more
qualification in companies, more stringent control, higher
penalties
holistic research is needed, e.g. for providing borders for
Law & Standardization, development of innovative ergonomic
solutions, …
Discussion
20
Benefits
Cost savings
Financial benefits
…
Costs
Investment costs
Ongoing costs
sick leave
follow-up costs
Risks
Project realization risks
Financial risks
Business risk
Initiation risk
Safety and Health risks
Business Cases
Time
TIMWOODS
…
Institute of Occupational Health, Safety and Ergonomics (ASER e.V.)
Corneliusstraße 31, 42329 Wuppertal, Germany
Thank You for you Attention!
Do you have questions / ideas? (voxr!)
Dipl.-Ing. Christoph Mühlemeyer, M.Sc.
Institut ASER e.V. & GEWITEB mbH, Wuppertal
Internet & Further Information / Tools: www.institut-aser.de
Email: [email protected]