ISO 10218-1:2025 and ISO 10218-2:2025

ISO 10218 is the central international standard for industrial robot safety. The 2025 editions (-1 published July 2025, -2 published July 2025) supersede the 2011 editions. Both parts are listed as harmonised under EU MR 2023/1230 (publication of citation in the EU OJ is ongoing as of 2026).

ISO 10218-1:2025 — Safety requirements for industrial robots — Part 1: Industrial robots. Robot manufacturer obligations. Design-level safety.
ISO 10218-2:2025 — Safety requirements for industrial robots — Part 2: Robot systems and integration. Integrator obligations. System-level safety in deployment.

Roboticks is audit-readiness tooling, not a certified toolchain. We assemble the evidence your notified body, certification body, or QA process ingests. We do not replace tool qualification (DO-178C, ISO 26262-8 TCL) and we do not issue conformity assessments. Verify the regulatory interpretations on this page against the standard text and your accredited assessor.

What changed in 2025

The 2025 editions are a substantial revision. Key changes:

Area	What changed
Collaborative operation	Expanded normative coverage; tighter coupling with ISO/TS 15066. The 2025 editions formalise the four collaborative-operation modes that were guidance in the 2011 editions.
Safety-rated software	Explicit requirements for safety-rated software development and verification, aligned to IEC 62061 SIL CL or EN ISO 13849 PL.
Cybersecurity	New clauses on protection of safety functions against malicious modification, aligned with the cybersecurity expectations of EU MR 2023/1230.
Mobile manipulators	Treatment of robot arms mounted on mobile bases (a gap in the 2011 editions).
Risk-assessment integration	Stronger coupling with ISO 12100 risk-assessment methodology.
Performance levels	Updated PL / SIL CL minimums for specific safety functions (e.g., protective stop, safety-rated monitored speed, safety-rated monitored stop).

The 2011 editions remain valid for products placed on the market under 2006/42/EC before 20 January 2027. Products placed on the market from that date typically reference the 2025 editions to claim presumption of conformity under EU MR 2023/1230.

Scope split

Part	Audience	Typical Roboticks project
-1	Robot manufacturers (those placing the robot on the market)	The firmware/control project for an industrial-robot arm or cobot platform
-2	Integrators (those building robot systems / cells)	The application/cell project that combines robot arm + tooling + safeguarding + workpiece handling

A single organisation often runs both — Roboticks supports this with separate projects sharing the same org-wide pin of both parts.

What Roboticks supports

Clause-level derivation for both parts. Author requirements that link to specific clauses (e.g., ISO 10218-1:2025 §5.4.2 for safety-rated monitored stop).
Cobot section coverage — clauses 5.10–5.11 (-1) and 5.11 (-2) covering collaborative operation. Cross-references ISO/TS 15066 for contact-force derivations.
Safety-rated software requirements with PL / SIL CL annotation on the requirement (asil_pl: PLd).
Deadline assertions via the SDK @deadline decorator — the natural way to verify protective-stop and safety-rated-monitored-stop response times.
Fault-injection assertions via SDK inject_fault() to verify safety-rated monitored stop on encoder fault, on power loss, on E-stop assertion.

What Roboticks does not do

We do not perform ISO 10218 conformity assessment.
We do not validate your PL / SIL CL determination (the input to PL determination is a hazard analysis Roboticks does not perform).
We do not generate the application-specific safety case — that is your safety engineer’s product.

Example derived requirement

- id: REQ-014
  title: Protective stop response time within 100 ms
  type: safety
  asil_pl: PLd
  derives_from:
    - standard: iso-10218-1-2025
      clause: "§5.4.3 Protective stop"
      edition: "2025-07"
  text: |
    On assertion of any protective-stop input (Category 1 stop per
    IEC 60204-1), all actuators shall reach the safe stop state
    within 100 ms, as measured at the wheel encoders. The control
    system shall remain energised to maintain stop integrity.
  acceptance:
    - test: tests/safety/test_protective_stop.py::test_estop_assertion_halts
    - test: tests/safety/test_protective_stop.py::test_encoder_response_under_100ms
    - test: tests/safety/test_protective_stop.py::test_control_remains_energised

Pair with @deadline(milliseconds=100):

from roboticks import confirms, deadline

@confirms("REQ-014")
@deadline(milliseconds=100)
def test_encoder_response_under_100ms(robot):
    robot.command_velocity(1.0)
    t0 = robot.now()
    robot.assert_protective_stop()
    robot.wait_until_stopped()
    elapsed_ms = (robot.now() - t0).milliseconds
    assert elapsed_ms < 100

The @deadline decorator emits a JUnit property the evidence pack picks up, so the auditor sees both the assertion and the platform-measured deadline.

Suggested test patterns

Clause area	Pattern
§5.4 Stop functions	`@deadline` + fault injection on stop sources
§5.7 Speed and motion limits	Trajectory tests with sim-measured TCP speed asserted against limits
§5.10 Collaborative operation, SMS (Safety-rated Monitored Stop)	Scenario tests with human-proximity detection mocked, verify TCP zero-velocity
§5.10 Collaborative operation, PFL (Power and Force Limiting)	Sim runs with force sensors; cross-derive from ISO/TS 15066 thresholds
§5.12 Cybersecurity	Fuzz of safety-relevant interfaces; SARIF coverage

Conformity route

A robot built to ISO 10218-1:2025 typically claims presumption of conformity to the relevant EHSRs of EU MR 2023/1230. The evidence pack feeds the technical file:

Requirements snapshot linked to ISO 10218-1:2025 clauses.
Test evidence for each clause-derived requirement.
Coverage and static-analysis evidence for safety-rated software clauses.
MCAP recordings of sim-based scenario tests.

For high-risk machinery (Annex I of EU MR 2023/1230), a notified body assesses the technical file as part of the EU-type examination. See the industrial-robot ISO 10218 compliance pattern for the workflow.

Pinning

rbtk standard pin iso-10218-1-2025 --project acme-robotics/firmware
rbtk standard pin iso-10218-2-2025 --project acme-robotics/cell-integration

For most customers, pinning both parts is the right answer even if only one is the primary obligation — the cross-references between them are dense, and integrators benefit from seeing the manufacturer-side requirements their suppliers must meet.

Next steps

Industrial-robot pattern

End-to-end ISO 10218-1:2025 conformity workflow.

ISO/TS 15066

Cobot contact-force limits, cross-derived from ISO 10218.

ISO 13849

PL determination cited in many ISO 10218 clauses.

IEC 62061

SIL CL determination, alternative to PL for the same clauses.

Quick Start

GitHub App

Requirements

Traceability

Testing

SDK

Self-Hosted Runners

AI Features

CLI

Evidence Packs

Standards Coverage

Compliance Patterns

Integrations

Pricing

Resources

ISO 10218-1:2025 and ISO 10218-2:2025

ISO 10218-1:2025 and ISO 10218-2:2025

What changed in 2025

Scope split

What Roboticks supports

What Roboticks does not do

Example derived requirement

Suggested test patterns

Conformity route

Pinning

Next steps

Industrial-robot pattern

ISO/TS 15066

ISO 13849

IEC 62061

​ISO 10218-1:2025 and ISO 10218-2:2025

​What changed in 2025

​Scope split

​What Roboticks supports

​What Roboticks does not do

​Example derived requirement

​Suggested test patterns

​Conformity route

​Pinning

​Next steps

Industrial-robot pattern

ISO/TS 15066

ISO 13849

IEC 62061

ISO 10218-1:2025 and ISO 10218-2:2025

What changed in 2025

Scope split

What Roboticks supports

What Roboticks does not do

Example derived requirement

Suggested test patterns

Conformity route

Pinning

Next steps