Bibbo Daniele, Corvini Giovanni, Schmid Maurizio, Ranaldi Simone, Conforto Silvia
Department of Industrial, Electronic and Mechanical Engineering, Roma Tre University, Via Vito Volterra, 62 - Corpo B, Roma, 00146, Italy, 39 0657337298.
JMIR Hum Factors. 2025 Feb 27;12:e64892. doi: 10.2196/64892.
The integration of collaborative robots (cobots) in industrial settings has the potential to enhance worker safety and efficiency by improving postural control and reducing biomechanical risk. Understanding the specific impacts of varying levels of human-robot collaboration on these factors is crucial for optimizing cobot use.
This study aims to investigate the biomechanical effects of different levels of human-robot collaboration on postural stability and control during simulated working tasks.
A total of 14 participants performed simulated cashier working activities under 4 different collaboration modalities, with increasing levels of cobot assistance: full (Fu), half robot touch (HRT), half robot (HRb), and full robot (FRb). Center of pressure trajectories were extracted from 2 force plates' data to calculate 4 posturography parameters-mean distance (MDIST), mean velocity (MVELO), 95% confidence ellipse area (AREA-CE), and sway area (AREA-SW)-which were analyzed to assess the impact of cobot intervention on postural control.
Nonparametric tests showed significance in the effect of the collaboration modalities on the 4 analyzed parameters. Post hoc tests revealed that FRb modality led to the greatest enhancement in postural stability, with a reduction in MDIST (4.2, SD 1.3 cm in Fu vs 1.6, SD 0.5 cm in FRb) and MVELO (16.3, SD 5.2 cm/s in Fu vs 7.9, SD 1.1 cm/s in FRb). AREA-CE and AREA-SW also decreased significantly with higher levels of cobot assistance (AREA-CE: 134, SD 91 cm² in Fu vs 22, SD 12 cm² in FRb; AREA-SW: 16.2, SD 8.4 cm²/s in Fu vs 4.0, SD 1.6 cm²/s in FRb). Complete assistance of the cobot significantly reduced interindividual variability of all center of pressure parameters. In FRb modality, as compared with all other conditions, removing the weight of the object during loading or unloading phases caused a significant decrease in all parameter values.
Increased cobot assistance significantly enhances postural stability and reduces biomechanical load on workers during simulated tasks. Full assistance from cobots, in particular, minimizes postural displacements, indicating more consistent postural control improvements across individuals. However, high levels of cobot intervention also reduced the natural variation in how people balanced themselves. This could potentially lead to discomfort in the long run. Midlevel cobot assistance modalities can thus be considered as a good compromise in reducing biomechanical risks associated with postural stability at the same time granting a satisfactory level of user control.
在工业环境中集成协作机器人(cobots)有潜力通过改善姿势控制和降低生物力学风险来提高工人的安全性和效率。了解不同程度的人机协作对这些因素的具体影响对于优化协作机器人的使用至关重要。
本研究旨在调查不同程度的人机协作在模拟工作任务期间对姿势稳定性和控制的生物力学影响。
共有14名参与者在4种不同的协作模式下进行模拟收银员工作活动,协作机器人的协助程度逐渐增加:全协助(Fu)、半机器人接触(HRT)、半机器人(HRb)和全机器人(FRb)。从2块测力板的数据中提取压力中心轨迹,以计算4个姿势描记参数——平均距离(MDIST)、平均速度(MVELO)、95%置信椭圆面积(AREA-CE)和摆动面积(AREA-SW)——对这些参数进行分析,以评估协作机器人干预对姿势控制的影响。
非参数检验表明协作模式对4个分析参数有显著影响。事后检验显示,FRb模式导致姿势稳定性增强最大,MDIST降低(Fu组为4.2,标准差1.3厘米;FRb组为1.6,标准差0.5厘米),MVELO降低(Fu组为16.3,标准差5.2厘米/秒;FRb组为7.9,标准差1.1厘米/秒)。随着协作机器人协助程度的提高,AREA-CE和AREA-SW也显著降低(AREA-CE:Fu组为134,标准差91平方厘米;FRb组为22,标准差12平方厘米;AREA-SW:Fu组为16.2,标准差8.4平方厘米/秒;FRb组为4.0,标准差1.6平方厘米/秒)。协作机器人的完全协助显著降低了所有压力中心参数的个体间变异性。在FRb模式下,与所有其他条件相比,在装载或卸载阶段移除物体重量会导致所有参数值显著下降。
在模拟任务期间,协作机器人协助程度的提高显著增强了姿势稳定性并减轻了工人的生物力学负荷。特别是协作机器人的全协助使姿势位移最小化,表明个体间姿势控制的改善更加一致。然而,高水平的协作机器人干预也减少了人们平衡自身方式的自然变化。从长远来看,这可能会导致不适。因此,可以将中等程度的协作机器人协助模式视为在降低与姿势稳定性相关的生物力学风险的同时,给予用户满意控制水平的良好折衷方案。