> ## 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.

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

> Industrial robot safety. The 2025 editions replaced the 2011 ones. Robot design (-1) and integration (-2), cobots, motion control, safety-rated stop.

# 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.

<Warning>
  **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.
</Warning>

## 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](/standards/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](/sdk/overview) `@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

```yaml theme={null}
- 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)`:

```python theme={null}
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](/compliance/industrial-robot-iso-10218) for the workflow.

## Pinning

```bash theme={null}
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

<CardGroup cols={2}>
  <Card title="Industrial-robot pattern" icon="industry" href="/compliance/industrial-robot-iso-10218">
    End-to-end ISO 10218-1:2025 conformity workflow.
  </Card>

  <Card title="ISO/TS 15066" icon="handshake" href="/standards/iso-ts-15066">
    Cobot contact-force limits, cross-derived from ISO 10218.
  </Card>

  <Card title="ISO 13849" icon="shield-halved" href="/standards/iso-13849">
    PL determination cited in many ISO 10218 clauses.
  </Card>

  <Card title="IEC 62061" icon="gears" href="/standards/iec-62061">
    SIL CL determination, alternative to PL for the same clauses.
  </Card>
</CardGroup>