I completely agree, Ron. That is the problem.
--
Doug Nix
[email protected]
(519) 729-5704
"Assumptions are the death of possibility." James Mapes
On 10-May-10, at 18:49 , Ronald R. Wellman wrote:
Very interesting, but I have a different view on this that is not
science
fiction or left to academia.
If you use risk analysis or hazard based safety engineering, you can
assess
hazards to a point where risks are tolerable or not by setting limits, using
barriers, selecting specific materials, etc. How you address the risks is
where you need to use engineering principles to create engineering solutions.
This has nothing to do with whether you are making a toaster or a pacemaker
because the principles apply to all product types.
Unfortunately, this is always a hard sell because some people don't
want to
think outside the box and want a quick solution to their problems. Standards
will eventually catch up with technology but in the meantime you have to
design safe products with the tools you have. However, the tools have always
been there. It's just a matter of actually using them.
-Ron Wellman
> I concur that the view is "interesting". And making it interesting is
the
> job of academia and the purpose of a science-fiction writer. But we
are
the people, after all the glamour and hype, that are left to make it
practical.
>
> In addition to the previously mentioned risk standard, look at the
stuff
here http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/robotics/standards.html
>
> And yes, I know that these stds/regs are for the industrial user. But
this
> is where you start.
>
> As for the Asimov laws - I remember a bizarre series of PDEs from a
school
> lecture that were intended to emulate the break points for the
> 'progression' through each law. It was never explained where the data
would come from or how the data would be qualified. So we had a very
interesting mathematical model for robot safety without any way to populate
with data.
>
> The problems with robot software safety is that there is no 'safe'
data
model for this world, that there is no OS that has successfully
> implemented hardware-controlled memory management; that there is no OS
that is capable of both process isolation and deconstruction of a
single or
of multiple processes into safe parallel threads, and that there is no
> OS that can run a process more complex than a single-variable loop
that
is
> deterministic. In short, P versus NP.
>
> Last year, I wrote some lectures for a short high school course on
programmable motion. I found some safety notes from a university
web-site
> (lost the reference), and derived the following main points of safety.
>
> 1. Areas of danger
> 2. Rate of motion
> 3. Human-prediction of motion
>
> For industrial equipment, the danger zone is more likely to be
> well-defined, and because motion is typically repetitive, the motion
is
predictable by humans for a given temporal reference. But for truly
useful
> 'home' robotics, these three robotic safety principles would require
the
bulk of the processing overhead. Ultimately, there will be no autonomous
mobile system for home use, any more advanced than the Roomba, that can have
any deterministic software safety until we have singularity. So we are left
with the mechanical interlock.
>
> Brian
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf
> > Of Ronald R.
> > Wellman
> > Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 8:56 PM
> > To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: Robotics Operational Safety Standarads
> >
> > Hello Robert,
> >
> > You present an interesting view of how to look at robotic
> > systems that
> > really needs open discussion.
From my experience, you are
> > better to look at
> > risk levels and determine what is tolerable and what is not.
> > ISO 14971 is
> > one possible reference for risk assessment but there are
> > other standards you
> > can apply.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Ron Wellman, NCE, RAC
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> > Of [email protected]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 11:43 AM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Robotics Operational Safety Standarads
> >
> > Ladies, Gentlemen,
> >
> > Safety from mobile robots operating within a non-technical
> > group of users
> > are/will be of concern to agencies, companies, and
> > individuals involved in
> > this industry. I've been tasked with seeking information
> > about such Safety
> > Standards - find standards, contact organizations/individuals, etc.
> >
> > I know there exists a plethora of related industrial robotic
> > standards,
> > but those standards seem like Class A versus Class B. Does
> > anyone know of,
> > or is anyone pursuing, any "Class B" standards?
> >
> > Who at IEEE is responsible for these standards and would
> > actively take
> > part in creating/extending operational safety standards?
> >
> > Who within any country?
> >
> > Feel free to reply 'off line'
> >
> > Regards,
> > Robert Macy, PE
> >
> > AJM Electronics
> > 101 E San Fernando St., Ste 402
> > San Jose, CA 95112
> > tel: 408 982 7574
> > cel: 408 286 3985
> > fax: 408 297 9121
> > [email protected]
>
> -
> ---------------------------------------------------------------- This
message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc
> discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
<[email protected]>
>
> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
> Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to
that
URL.
>
> Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
> Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
> List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
>
> For help, send mail to the list administrators:
> Scott Douglas <[email protected]>
> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]>
>
> For policy questions, send mail to:
> Jim Bacher: <[email protected]>
> David Heald: <[email protected]>
-
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
<[email protected]>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to
that URL.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <[email protected]>
Mike Cantwell <[email protected]>
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <[email protected]>
David Heald <[email protected]> <untitled-[1.2]><untitled-[2].html>
-
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc
discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to
<[email protected]>
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at
http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL.
Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <[email protected]>
Mike Cantwell <[email protected]>
For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher <[email protected]>
David Heald <[email protected]>
