Collaborative robot safety standards outline the guidelines for ensuring the safe coexistence of humans and robots in the same workspace. 

Standards such as ISO 10218:2025 establish limits on force, speed, and protective features, ensuring cobots reduce risk without the need for cages or fencing. 

In 2025, these rules are critical as manufacturers adopt cobots for high-mix, low-volume production where flexibility and safety must go hand in hand.

Understanding collaborative robot safety standards

Understanding collaborative robot safety standards means knowing the international and regional rules that guide how cobots safely operate near people. Unlike traditional robot standards that assume physical separation, cobot standards emphasize safe interaction through design, control systems, and risk reduction. 

Collaboration is only safe when all hazards are identified and reduced to acceptable levels. Cobot safety standards rely on risk assessments tailored to each application, rather than prescribing one-size-fits-all solutions. 

For cobots, this means evaluating things like:

• Human intention and behavior
• Workspace layout and escape zones
• Contact points and potential impact force
• Task-specific hazards such as sharp tools, heat, or chemicals

The most important standards governing cobot safety include ISO 10218:2025 for industrial robots (which integrates the former ISO/TS 15066 for human-robot collaboration), and ANSI/RIA R15.06 in the U.S. These focus on different aspects of safe deployment and interaction.

‍

Key global and regional safety standards

Cobot safety is defined by a mix of international and regional standards, each focusing on different aspects of robot behavior, workspace safety, and human interaction. Together, these frameworks form the baseline for designing, deploying, and auditing safe cobot systems.

ISO 10218 (Parts 1 and 2)

ISO 10218-1:2025 and ISO 10218-2:2025 are the latest editions governing industrial robot safety, replacing the 2011 versions. The updates add clearer functional safety requirements, new classifications, and test methods. They also bring in requirements for collaborative applications, which were previously covered in ISO/TS 15066. 

The standards now include cybersecurity measures and guidance for safe end effector handling and manual load or unload tasks.

ISO/TS 15066

ISO/TS 15066 has been integrated into ISO 10218-2:2025. These standards have replaced the term “cobot” with “collaborative applications,” reflecting that safety depends on how the robot is used rather than the robot itself.

ANSI/RIA R15.06 and CSA Z434

ANSI/RIA R15.06 in the U.S. and CSA Z434 in Canada are being updated to align with the new ISO 10218 revisions. These regional standards ensure consistency in collaborative robot safety requirements across North America.

ISO 13482

ISO 13482 covers personal care and service robots, such as mobile assistants, telepresence devices, and some humanoid robots. It focuses on non-industrial applications where robots operate in close contact with the general public. 

Key concerns include stability, collision avoidance, and fail-safe behavior in uncontrolled environments like homes or hospitals.

ISO 13849

ISO 13849 governs the functional safety of machine control systems. For cobots, this standard is used to validate safety-rated features like emergency stops, protective zone monitoring, and reduced speed modes. It defines the required performance levels (PL) and safety functions that must remain reliable under fault conditions.

‍

Core cobot safety features and technologies

Core cobot safety features and technologies define how cobots reduce injury risk when working in shared spaces. These features include power and force limiting, speed and separation monitoring, hand-guiding, and safety-rated systems. 

Together, they allow cobots to work without cages while maintaining compliance with international standards.

Power and force limiting (PFL)

Power and force limiting prevent injury by keeping physical contact forces below harmful thresholds. Sensors in the robot’s joints detect resistance or unexpected impact, prompting an immediate stop or power reduction. 

ISO/TS 15066 provides the reference data for allowable force and pressure across various body regions, which manufacturers use to calibrate their systems. This feature is essential for applications involving close, frequent human interaction.

Speed and separation monitoring

Speed and separation monitoring dynamically adjust robot behavior based on proximity to humans. Cobots use laser scanners, radar, or 3D vision to track nearby movement. 

When a person enters a defined safety zone, the system slows or halts motion to prevent collisions. This approach maintains operational efficiency while creating a responsive safety buffer.

Hand-guiding

Hand-guiding enables the operator to physically move the robot into position or assist with manual tasks. This mode is often used for teaching or during collaborative handling. 

Force sensors in the arm detect user input, allowing smooth and compliant motion without resistance. Some systems also feature haptic feedback or buttons that lock movement when released, adding another layer of control and protection.

Safety-rated monitoring systems

Safety-rated systems continuously track key metrics like position, speed, and torque using certified hardware and software. These systems follow ISO 13849 or IEC 62061 standards, ensuring reliability even during faults. 

If any parameter exceeds a predefined safety threshold, the robot immediately enters a protective stop mode. This monitoring is critical in high-speed or variable-load operations.

Emergency stops and protective covers

Every cobot must include marked emergency stop buttons and physical design features that minimize injury risk. These include rounded edges, padded exteriors, and joint covers to prevent pinch points. In crowded or fast-paced environments, accessible e-stops allow operators to quickly shut down the robot if anything goes wrong.

Low-latency communication technologies

Real-time protocols like EtherCAT, PROFINET, or Safety over Ethernet allow cobots to respond rapidly during critical events. These systems transmit signals between sensors, controllers, and actuators in milliseconds, reducing lag between hazard detection and robot response. 

Low-latency networking is critical in collaborative environments because fast reaction times directly prevent injury.

‍

Conducting effective risk assessments

Conducting effective risk assessments is essential before deploying any cobot. A structured process ensures hazards are identified, ranked, and reduced to acceptable levels. Unlike traditional robots, cobots require ongoing reassessment since they operate directly in shared spaces.

Step 1: Identify all hazards

Begin by mapping every task the cobot performs and every way a person may interact with it. Look for:

• Sharp tools or heat sources
• Pinch points around joints and grippers
• Unexpected motion from tooling or payload changes
• Environmental factors like lighting, slippery floors, or confined spaces

Step 2: Rank each risk

Use standard methods based on severity and probability. ISO 12100 and ISO/TS 15066 offer structured templates for this step, and a detailed cobot risk assessment ensures hazards are clearly defined before deployment.

Step 3: Apply risk reduction measures

Once hazards are ranked, implement protections. 

This could include:

• Adding foam padding or soft grippers
• Enabling speed and separation monitoring
• Limiting movement to a reduced work envelope
• Using lightweight tools and reduced torque modes

If risk can’t be reduced to an acceptable level with built-in features, external barriers or redesign may be required.

Step 4: Reassess regularly

Cobot applications evolve, so each change in programming, tooling, or layout requires a new safety review. Always reassess safety after changes in programming, tooling, workspace layout, or staffing. New risks can emerge when operators start taking shortcuts or when hardware degrades over time.

‍

Common challenges and pitfalls

Common challenges and pitfalls in cobot safety often appear when companies skip assessments, misinterpret standards, or over-rely on built-in design features. In practice, risks come from human unpredictability, outdated assessments, or poor integration with legacy systems.

Below are the most common issues that undermine collaborative robot safety in real deployments:

1. Infrequent or outdated risk assessments: Many facilities perform an initial risk analysis but fail to revisit it after programming updates, tool changes, or workspace modifications. Without regular reassessment, new hazards can go unnoticed and unmitigated.
   ‍
2. Misunderstanding human behavior: Cobots are often programmed with assumptions about operator behavior, like standing in a specific spot or following safe handoff protocols. In reality, humans move unpredictably, especially under pressure. Systems must account for variability, not ideal workflows.
   ‍
3. Over-reliance on “safe by design”: Many assume cobots are inherently safe, but context determines actual risk. A power-and-force-limited robot handling a sharp blade or hot part can still injure someone. Risk mitigation must go beyond the hardware label.
   ‍
4. Integration with legacy systems: Combining cobots with older machinery can introduce compatibility and safety issues, especially when legacy systems lack safety-rated I/O or real-time monitoring. This mismatch can delay stop signals or disable emergency functions. These gaps are common when working outside current industrial robot safety standards.
   ‍
5. Training and documentation gaps: Operators typically receive little training beyond basic movement and stop controls. Without clear safety protocols and documented procedures, misuse becomes more likely, especially during shift changes or task reassignments.

‍

Future trends in cobot safety standards

Future trends in cobot safety standards point toward AI-driven, adaptive models. Instead of relying only on fixed limits, new standards will enable robots to predict unsafe movement, adjust thresholds based on tasks, and integrate with plant-wide safety systems.

• AI-driven predictive safety: Instead of reacting to contact or proximity, future systems will anticipate risk based on operator behavior and sensor trends. AI models can detect unusual human movement, predict unsafe trajectories, and adjust robot behavior in real time. This shift could reduce collisions even in fast-paced, multi-operator environments.
  ‍
• Adaptive safety thresholds: Rather than applying a single global speed or force limit, robots will adjust thresholds based on task, tooling, and worker proximity. A robot sanding a panel, for example, could run full-speed when alone, then slow down automatically as soon as a technician enters the work area.
  ‍
• Integration with workplace safety systems: Cobots are increasingly connected to larger factory safety systems, including real-time tracking via RTLS, smart vision for floor mapping, and centralized emergency stop networks. These integrations are already appearing in large-scale operations using mobile platforms and multiple cobots.
  ‍
• Regulatory convergence: Expect to see greater alignment between ISO, ANSI/RIA, and regional authorities like the EU Machinery Regulation. The push is toward harmonized definitions of “collaborative,” standardized test procedures, and global force/pressure benchmarks. Updates to ISO/TS 15066 and new annexes under ISO 10218 are likely within the next few years.

Final thoughts

Collaborative robot safety in 2025 is defined by updated ISO 10218 standards, which now include requirements for collaborative applications and integrate the former ISO/TS 15066. For manufacturers, the key takeaway is that compliance means more than picking a “safe” robot, since it requires application-specific risk assessments, validated safety functions, and ongoing reviews as processes change.

Core features such as power and force limiting, speed and separation monitoring, and safety-rated control systems make it possible to deploy cobots without cages. But their effectiveness depends on proper integration, training, and regular reassessment.

The bottom line is simple: manufacturers adopting cobots must treat safety as a continuous process, not a one-time setup. Staying aligned with evolving standards ensures worker protection while keeping automation investments compliant and future-ready.

‍

Next steps with Standard Bots’ robotic solutions

Prioritizing cobot safety from day one? Standard Bots’ RO1 is the perfect six-axis cobot addition to any risk-conscious automation setup, delivering unbeatable precision and flexibility.

• Affordable and adaptable: RO1 costs $37K (list price). Get high-precision automation at half the cost of traditional robots.
• Precision and power: With a repeatability of ±0.025 mm and an 18 kg payload, RO1 handles even the most demanding CNC jobs.
• AI-driven simplicity: Equipped with AI capabilities on par with GPT-4, RO1 integrates smoothly with CNC systems for advanced automation.
• Safety-first design: Machine vision and collision detection mean RO1 works safely alongside human operators.

Schedule your on-site demo with our engineers today and see how RO1 can bring AI-powered safety and performance to your workspace.

‍

FAQs

1. What is ISO/TS 15066, and why is it vital for cobot safety?

ISO/TS 15066 was the technical specification that set limits for force, pressure, and speed in collaborative robot applications. It also outlined four methods of safe interaction: power and force limiting, speed and separation monitoring, hand-guiding, and safety-rated stop. 

Its guidance has now been absorbed into ISO 10218-2:2025, which defines collaborative applications under the updated industrial robot safety framework.

2. How does ISO 10218 compare to ISO/TS 15066?

ISO 10218-1 and 10218-2 set the global baseline for industrial robot safety, covering design, integration, and installation. ISO/TS 15066 added specific guidance for collaborative use, such as safe force limits and body contact thresholds. 

With the 2025 revision, these requirements are fully integrated into ISO 10218-2, which now governs collaborative applications without the need for a separate specification.

3. What safety features are standard in collaborative robots?

Safety features that are standard in collaborative robots include power and force limiting, emergency stop buttons, and speed reduction when humans approach. Many models also use safety-rated controllers, protective covers, and 3D vision or sensors to track operator movement.

4. How do I conduct a risk assessment for a cobot application?

To conduct a risk assessment for a cobot application, first identify hazards such as pinch points, sharp tools, or unexpected motion. Rank each risk by severity and probability using standard templates. Apply mitigation measures such as speed limits, padding, or safe zones, and then reassess regularly as tasks and layouts change.

5. Is ANSI/RIA R15.06 still relevant for cobot safety?

ANSI/RIA R15.06 is still relevant for cobot safety in the U.S. because it aligns with ISO 10218 and supports OSHA compliance. While written for industrial robots, it’s often paired with ISO/TS 15066 to cover collaborative applications.

6. What new technologies are shaping the future of cobot safety?

New technologies shaping the future of cobot safety include AI-driven predictive systems, real-time human detection, and adaptive thresholds for force and speed. These enable robots to anticipate unsafe behavior, adjust in real time, and integrate with factory-wide safety networks.