Documentation Index
Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.roboticks.io/llms.txt
Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.
Cobot — ISO/TS 15066
This pattern is for cobot integrators and cobot-platform manufacturers demonstrating Power and Force Limiting (PFL) collaborative operation under ISO 10218 — specifically the contact-force limits of ISO/TS 15066. Applicable both to the cobot-arm vendor and to the cell integrator who builds the PFL application around the arm.Scenario
You ship a cobot, or a cobot application, intended to operate in PFL mode — direct unguarded interaction with a human operator. Your obligations:- For every foreseeable contact between cobot and operator, demonstrate the resulting force and pressure stay below the ISO/TS 15066 Annex A biomechanical limits for the relevant body region.
- Document the contact scenarios analysed.
- Provide verification evidence — sim runs, hardware-in-the-loop measurements, or a hybrid.
Prerequisites
| Off-platform | Why |
|---|---|
| Risk assessment per ISO 12100 with explicit contact analysis | Drives the contact-scenario set |
| Licensed copy of ISO/TS 15066 with Annex A | Source of the threshold numbers |
| Validated contact model in sim (if sim is your evidence vehicle) | Anchors the sim-vs-reality equivalence claim |
| Hardware contact-force rig (if hardware is your evidence vehicle) | Direct measurement |
Project setup
Pin the standards stack
Author the contact-scenario set
Create A typical project ends up with 50–300 contact scenarios across all body regions.
scenarios/contact_*.yaml files, one per body region. Each lists the scenarios — initial pose, trajectory, contact geometry, expected contact-mode (transient or quasi-static).Author the requirements
One requirement per (body region, contact mode) tuple. See the ISO/TS 15066 derivation example.
Test patterns
The dominant test is parameterised across the contact-scenario set, asserting peak force / pressure under the Annex A threshold:- In Gazebo: pulls wrench data from the contact-sensor plugin.
- In Webots: pulls touch-sensor data.
- For hardware: reads from your force / torque sensor stream over ROS2.
Sim-vs-reality anchoring
For sim-evidenced projects, run a smaller hardware-in-the-loop spot-test set (typically 10–20 scenarios chosen to span the contact-mode × body-region grid) and prove the sim contact-force model agrees with hardware measurement within an acceptance band. The spot-test results are themselves requirements:Release and handoff
Cut releases on every firmware version that ships, generate the evidence pack, hand to the notified body per the customer-handoff procedure. Expect the assessor to:- Drill into the contact-scenario set — coverage of foreseeable contact, completeness across body regions.
- Question the sim-vs-reality equivalence — your
REQ-SIM-VALIDATION-001evidence answers this. - Restore specific contact-scenario MCAPs from Glacier.
- Re-verify a subset of scenarios on demand (cobot demos with a sample fixture are common during the assessment).
Maintenance
| Event | Action |
|---|---|
| ISO/TS 15066 amendment (rare; the TS is stable) | Re-conformity workflow |
| ISO 10218 amendment (more common) | Re-conformity; many cobot requirements cross-derive |
| New end-effector / new payload | Add scenarios; re-verify the affected body-region requirements |
| Customer field-report of unexpected contact | Generate ad-hoc pack scoped to the field-build; investigate; add scenarios to prevent regression |
Next steps
ISO/TS 15066 standard page
The threshold reference.
ISO 10218 pattern
The broader industrial-robot pattern.
EU MR conformity
For the full conformity assessment under EU MR 2023/1230.