Advertisement

The Comfort Zone Concept in a Human-Robot Cooperative Task

  • Alireza ChangiziEmail author
  • Minna Lanz
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 530)

Abstract

The global rise in interest towards robotics and artificial intelligence is increasing the technology acceptance among companies. This further encourages manufacturing companies to invest more in robotics on their factory floor. A robot manipulator can be sufficiently mobile and dexterous to operate alongside a human as would any other colleague. However, a human-centric viewpoint is needed in the design of the work cell to provide optimal working conditions for humans and thereby enhance employee performance. We identified a set of factors required for human comfort during cooperation with robots. These factors were divided into two main groups: mental and physical. Both mental and physical factors were based on scientific work reviews, robotics standards, and recognized human factors via a case study. These factors together are the basis for a comfort zone concept in human-robot collaboration. This concept forms design principles for developing the physical work environment of the future.

Keywords

Comfort zone concept Human robot cooperation Interaction Collaboration Cognition 

References

  1. 1.
    Lanz, M., Tuokko, R.: Concepts, methods and tools for individualized production, 4th edn. In: Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, Production Engineering (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W., Helbig, J.: Recommendations for implementing the strategic initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0: Final report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group. German Federation Ministry of Education and Research (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ryan, R., Deci, E.: Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am. Psychol. 55(1), 68–78 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Resnick, S.M., Pham, D.L., Kraut, M.A., Zonderman, A.B., Davatzikos, C.: Longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging studies of older adults: a shrinking brain. J. Neurosci. 23, 3295–3301 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Royall, D.R., Palmer, R., Chiodo, L.K., Polk, M.J.: Declining executive control in normal aging predicts change in functional status: the freedom house study. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 52(3), 346–352 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boot, W.R., et al.: Design for aging, 4th edn. In: Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, pp. 1442–1471 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    ANSI B11.TR: Standard for Ergonomic Guidelines for the Design, Installation And Use of Machine Tools, p. 1 (2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    ISO/TS 15066: Standard for Robots and robotic devices - Collaborative robots (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Eurostat Statistics: People in the EU: who are we and how do we live? Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2015)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reymen, D., et al.: Labour Market Shortages in the European Union. Economic and Scientific Policy, European Parliament, Brussels, Policy Department A (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bannon, L.J., Greenbaum, J., Kyng, M.: From human factors to human actors: the role of psychology and human-computer interaction studies in system design. J. Des. Work.: Coop. Des. Comput. Syst. 25–44 (1991). BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Strongman, K.T.: The Psychology of Emotion, 5th edn. Wiley, Hoboken (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sheldon, K.M., Elliot, A.J., Kim, Y., Kasser, T.: What is satisfying about satisfying events? Testing 10 candidate psychological needs. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 80(2), 325–339 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ventura, R.: Two faces of human-robot interaction: field and service robots. J. Mech. Mach. Sci. 16, 57–74 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fast-Berglund, A., Mattsson, S., Bligard, L.: Finding trends in human-automation interaction research in order to formulate a cognitive automation strategy for final assembly. Int. J. Adv. Robot. Autom. 1, 1–7 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tsarouchi, P., Matthaiakis, A.S., Makris, S., Chryssolouris, G.: On a human-robot collaboration in an assembly cell. Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 30(6), 580–589 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mourtzis, D., Doukas, M., Milas, N.: A knowledge-based social networking app for collaborative problem-solving in manufacturing. Manuf. Lett. 10, 1–5 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Devin, S., Alami, R.: An implemented theory of mind to improve human-robot shared plans execution. In: ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, pp. 319–326 (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tsarouchi, P., Makris, S., Chryssolouris, G.: Human-robot interaction-review and challenges on task planning and programming. Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 29(8), 916–931 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Austin, J.T., Vancouver, J.B.: Goal constructs in psychology: structure, process, and content. Psychol. Bull. 120(3), 338–375 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Amodio, D.M., Frith, C.D.: Meeting of minds: the medial frontal cortex and social cognition. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 7(4), 268–277 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Berlin, C.: Human factors experiences in context-comparing four industrial cases using a soft systems framework. Ergon. Open J. 4, 131–144 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lanz, M.: Logical and Semantic Foundations of Knowledge Representation for Assembly and Manufacturing Processes, Ph.D. thesis, Tampere University of Technology (2010)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bullinger, H.-J.: Ergonomie–Produkt–und Arbeit–splatzgestaltung. Teubner, Stuttgart (1994)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Spath, D., Braun, M., Meinken, K.: Human factors in manufacturing. In: Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, vol. 4, pp. 1643–1666 (2012)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., Moll, H.Y.: Understanding and sharing intentions: the origins of cultural cognition. Behav. Brain Sci. 28, 675–735 (2005)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kahn, P.H., et al.: Will people keep the secret of a humanoid robot? In: Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction - HRI, pp. 173–180 (2015)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Luczak, H.: Task design and motivation, 4th edn. In: Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, pp. 397–440(2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering SciencesTampere University of TechnologyTampereFinland

Personalised recommendations