Safety boundaries must be perceptible to people
Aliases: safety-zone visibility · protective separation display · visible workspace boundary
What it is
A perceptible safety boundary reveals robot reach, the region that triggers slowing or stopping, and prohibited occupancy. Floor marks, barriers, projection, posture, or environmental signals must correspond to the real dynamic protection region rather than a decorative circle.
Why it happens
An invisible algorithmic boundary is learned only after triggering, causing probing and repeated stops. Spatial cues externalise constraints for advance routing. Fixed marks become stale as speed, payload, and pose alter protection; dynamic display needs synchronisation.
Studying it
No mark, fixed mark, and dynamic boundary can compare route, intrusion, emergency stop, comprehension, and over-avoidance across angle, light, colour vision, and traffic. Display and control trigger need synchronised measurement. Compliance does not prove protection.
Where it stops holding
Visibility does not replace sensing and stopping, and some children, blind people, or crowds cannot perceive or obey. Oversized zones invite bypass; undersized zones create false safety. Security concerns do not remove minimum actionable information.
Applying it
- Distinguish maximum swept space, dynamic protection, and prohibited entry through stable spatial semantics.
- Drive display and control from one state source, falling back to a conservative region on desynchronisation.
- Under real flow, measure intrusion, detour, emergency stop, and accessible comprehension against actual trigger.
Related
- Same group: X5.01.1 Speed and force must be limited according to proximity · X5.01.3 Requiring people to avoid the robot is unacceptable
- Adjacent: X3.06 Communicating sensing range and blind spots · X5.02 Movement in shared space
- Search terms:
safety zone visualization·protective separation·workspace boundary