55

CHAPTER 5

INDUSTRIAL, PERSONAL, AND SERVICE ROBOTS

INTRODUCTION

Robots can be classified into different categories depending on their function and the market needs they are
designed for. Here we identify two major classes of robots, industrial robots and service robots. Within the
later class of robots, we will divide service robots into personal service robots and professional service
robots depending on their function and use (see Fig. 5.1 for example).

According to the Robotic Industries Association, an industrial robot is an automatically controlled,

According to the International Federation of Robotics, another professional organization, a service robot is a
robot which operates semi or fully autonomously to perform services useful to the well being of humans and
equipment, excluding manufacturing operations.

Personal robots are service robots that educate, assist, or entertain at home. These include domestic robots
that may perform daily chores, assistive robots (for people with disabilities), and robots that can serve as
companions or pets for entertainment.

Figure 5.1. Examples of robots. A FANUC industrial robot (left), a service robot used for security made by
Mobile Robotics (center), and a personal entertainment robot made by Sony (right).

Robots find applications in the so-called “4D tasks,” tasks that are dangerous, dull, dirty, or dumb. An
example of a task that may be too dangerous for humans to perform is the disposal of unexploded ordinance.
56 5. Industrial, Personal, and Service Robots

Many industrial automation tasks like assembly tasks are repetitive and tasks like painting are dirty. Robots
can sometimes easily perform these tasks. Human workers often don’t like tasks that don’t require
intelligence or exercise any decision-making skills. Many of these dumb tasks like vacuum cleaning or
loading packages onto pallets can be executed perfectly by robots with a precision and reliability that humans
may lack. As our population ages and the number of wage earners becomes a smaller fraction of our
population, it is clear that robots have to fill the void in society. Industrial, and to a greater extent, service
robots have the potential to fill this void in the coming years. See Figure 5.2 for the ratio of robot to human
workers in the manufacturing industry.

Figure 5.2. Number of industrial robots for every 10,000 human workers.

A second reason for the deployment of industrial robots is the trend toward small product volumes and an
increase in product variety. As the volume of products being produced decreases, hard automation becomes a
more expensive proposition, and robotics is the only alternative to manual production.

MARKET ANALYSIS AND TRENDS

Industrial robots account for a $4 billion market with a growth rate of around 4%. Most of the current
applications are either in material handling or in welding. Spot welding and painting operations in the
automotive industry are almost exclusively performed by robots. See Figure 5.3.

Industrial robots are improving in quality and the ratio of price to performance is falling. As Figure 5.4
shows, while prices have fallen over 40% over the last 15 years, the accuracy and payload rating of robots
have almost doubled in the same period.
Application (% sales, 2004)

Processing Other
Welding
33%
Painting

Assembly
Material handling
35%

Figure 5.3. Industrial Robot Sales (2004). Figure 5.4. Trends in robot price and performance.
 Vijay Kumar, George Bekey, Yuan Zheng 57

According to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), there are over 20,000
professional service robots in use today valued at an estimated $2.4 billion (see Table 5.1). If personal
entertainment robots and domestic robots like vacuum cleaners are included, this number is well over $3.5
billion. The UNECE estimates that the annual sales of service robots (both professional and personal) in 2005
will be around $5B.
Table 5.1
Service Robots Industry: Number of units currently in operation and estimated value.
Category No. Units Value ($ million)
Field (agriculture, forestry, mining) 885 117
Cleaning/maintenance 3370 68
Inspection 185 21
Construction, demolition 3030 195
Medical robotics 2440 352
Security, defense 1010 76
Underwater 4785 1467
Laboratory 3060 37
Others 2295 110
Total 21060 2443

STATE-OF-THE-ART IN THEORY AND PRACTICE

Today industrial robots present a mature technology. They are capable of lifting hundreds of pounds of
payload and positioning the weight with accuracy to a fraction of a millimeter. Sophisticated control
algorithms are used to perform positioning tasks exceptionally well in structure environments.

FANUC, the leading manufacturer of industrial robots, has an impressive array of industrial robot products
ranging from computerized numerically controlled (CNC) machines with 1 nm Cartesian resolution and 10-5
degrees angular resolution to robots with 450 kg payloads and 0.5 mm repeatability. Some of their robots
include such features as collision detection, compliance control, and payload inertia/weight identification.
The control software supports networking and continuous coordinated control of two arms. Force feedback is
sometimes used for assembly tasks. Vision-guided fixturing and grasping is becoming commonplace as
structured-lighting systems mature. Robots use vision to estimate the locations of parts to determine the exact
trajectory and type of operation. However, the cost of the end-effector tooling still remains a large fraction of
the total cost of the work cell. Typically the end-effector cost is often around 25% of the cost of the industrial
robot. Further, the cost of the robot is usually around 40% of the cost of the entire workcell.

The nature of robotic workcell has changed since early days of robotics. Instead of having a single robot
synchronized with material handling equipment like conveyors, robots now work together in a cooperative
fashion eliminating mechanized transfer devices. Human workers can be seen in closer proximity to robots
and human-robot cooperation is closer to becoming a reality.

However, industrial robots still do not have the sensing, control and decision making capability that is
required to operate in unstructured, 3D environments. Cost-effective, reliable force sensing for assembly still
remains a challenge. Finally we still lack the fundamental theory and algorithms for manipulation in
unstructured environments, and industrial robots currently lack dexterity in their end-effectors and hands.

The service robotics industry has leveraged recent advances in mobility, perception and algorithmic advances
that enable robots to localize in a two-dimensional map of the world, and map an unknown two-dimensional
environment. Vacuum cleaning robots use very simple algorithms to map sensory inputs to control
commands and cover a two-dimensional area while avoiding obstacles. Security robots are able to use
sensory information to infer their position in a two-dimensional world and send back images of the
58 5. Industrial, Personal, and Service Robots

environment to a remotely located human operator. Robots are able to provide logistics support in office and
industrial environments by transporting materials (packages, medicines, or supplies) or by leading visitors
through hallways. Remotely controlled and monitored robots are also able to enter hazardous or unpleasant
environments. Examples include underwater remotely operated vehicles, pipe cleaning and inspection robots,
and bomb disposal robots. Some examples are shown in Fig. 5.5.

Figure 5.5. Examples of service robots.

The challenges in service and personal robotics include all the challenges for industrial robotics. Dexterous
manipulation and integration of force and vision sensing in support of manipulation is critical to the growth
of this industry. In addition, mobility is a key challenge for service robotics. The current generation of robots
is only able to operate on two-dimensional, even, indoor environments. Because service robots must be
mobile, there are challenges for designing robots that are capable of carrying their own power source.
Further, operation in domestic environments imposes constraints on packaging. Finally, service robots,
especially personal robots, will operate close to human users. Safety is extremely important. And because
interaction with human users is very important in service robotics, it is clear the industry needs to overcome
significant challenges in human-robot interfaces.

INTERNATIONAL ASSESSMENT

U.S.

Most of the industrial robotics industry is based in Japan and Europe. This is despite the fact that the first
industrial robots were manufactured in the U.S. At one time, General Motors, Cincinnati Milacron,
Westinghouse and General Electric made robots. Now, only Adept, a San Jose-based company, makes
industrial robots in the U.S.

However, there are a number of small companies developing service robots in the U.S. iRobot and Mobile
Robotics, companies in New England, are pioneering new technologies.

Europe

The two big manufacturers of industrial robots in Europe are ABB and Kuka. Over 50% of ABB is focused
on automation products and industrial robots are a big part of their manufacturing automation with annual
revenue of $1.5B. ABB spends 5% of their revenues on R&D, with research centers all over the world. As in
 Vijay Kumar, George Bekey, Yuan Zheng 59

the automotive and other businesses, European companies outsource the manufacture of components
(motors, sensors), unlike Japanese companies, which emphasize vertical integration.

Figure 5.6. The ABB Pick-and-place robot capable of performing

As in the U.S., service robots are made by small companies, which include spin-offs launched from
university research programs.

Japan and Korea

FANUC is the leading manufacturer of industrial robots with products ranging from CNC machines with
1 nm Cartesian resolution and 10-5 degrees angular resolution to robots with 450 kg payloads and 0.5 mm
repeatability. FANUC has 17% of the industrial robotics market in Japan, 16% in Europe and 20% in North
America. After FANUC come Kawasaki and Yasakawa. FANUC is also the leading manufacturer of CNC
machines, with Siemens as its closest competitor.

Unlike the U.S. and Europe, the service robotics industry includes big companies like Sony, Fujitsu, and
Honda. The industry is driven by the perceived need for entertainment robots and domestic companions and
assistants (Fig. 5.7).

Figure 5.7. Personal robots in the Japanese industry.

Australia

Australia is a leader in field robotics. The University of Sydney’s Australian Center for Field Robotics has
developed many commercial robots for cargo handling and mining and operates a number of demonstration
vehicles. They have also pioneered the use of novel sensors like millimeter-wave radar for field applications
and new algorithms for state estimation and localization. See Figure 5.8.
60 5. Industrial, Personal, and Service Robots

Figure 5.8. Autonomous straddle carriers in operation at the Port of Brisbane (left)
and an autonomous mining haul truck (right)

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS

Relative Strengths

Even though industrial robots are mostly made in Europe and Japan, they have found acceptance in industry
all around the world. Figure 5.9 shows that the large majority of industrial robots (around 40%) are operating
in Japan, but this number was around 60% in 1990. It is clear from Figure 5.10 that the demand for industrial
robots is widespread, with Asia leading other regions. In Figure 5.11 the increase in Japanese demand is
comparable to the increase in Europe with the U.S. lagging behind slightly. The countries with above-
average growth rates are Korea and Taiwan.

In contrast to industrial robotics, the service robotics industry is more uniformly divided across the world.
There are many small service robotics companies in the U.S.; iRobot Corporation, Mobile Robotics, and
Evolution Robotics to name a few. Similarly, in Europe, commercial products include rehabilitation robots
on wheelchairs, tennis ball collectors, pool cleaners, window cleaners, and lawn mowers. The Japanese and
Korean robotics industry has developed many personal robots, some for entertainment and others as domestic
assistants. There is a noticeable difference in the emphasis on humanoid robots in Japan and Korea, directly
related to their interests in domestic companions, while the U.S. lags behind in this area with only a handful
of humanoid projects and virtually no commercial products.

U.S.

Japan

Europe

Rest of world

Figure 5.9. Industrial robots installed worldwide (2004).

Figure 5.10. Annual index of orders for industrial robots by region.

Figure 5.11. Number of installed industrial robots (left) and number of robots installed annually (right).

Qualitative observations

The most striking difference in research and development programs in robotics across the continents can be
seen in the level of coordination and collaboration between government, academia and industry. There is a
concerted effort to understand the big picture, and to develop and implement a national agenda in both Japan
and Korea. In Japan, the national strategy for creating new industries includes robotics as one of the seven
areas of emphasis. In Korea, robotics has been listed as one of the ten next-generation growth engines. The
Humanoid Project in Japan was an example of a national project involving many industrial, government and
academic research laboratories. Similarly, in Europe there are many EU projects across the continent that
bring together synergistic efforts and expertise in industry and academia with the goal of developing robotics
industry. The European Robotics Platform (EUROP) is a major new research initiative in Europe driven by a
joint academia/industry program. It was recently approved by the European Commission for funding from
2007–2013 at the level of $100 million (http://www.cas.kth.se/europ/EUROP). There are no such projects in
the U.S., and there is no national strategy for developing robotics in the U.S.

Second, it is also clear that Japan, Korea, and European countries have stronger professional associations and
national networks. The Japan Robot Association and the European Union Robotics Network (EURON -
http://www.euron.org), are examples of national networks.

The third observation is that the big companies in robotics are presently in Japan, Sweden, and Italy.
Robotics companies have a bigger presence in Europe and Asia. This includes small companies and start-ups.
62 5. Industrial, Personal, and Service Robots

Although the U.S. is known for its entrepreneurial culture, there appear to be more start-ups and spin-offs
from research labs in the Europe than in the U.S.

Finally, it is worth remarking on technical strengths and emphases in the different continents. While the
U.S.-led research and development efforts have emphasized wheeled mobility, perception, and autonomy in
navigation, the efforts elsewhere have addressed legged mobility, and perception and autonomy in support of
other tasks such as manipulation tasks. Human-robot interaction is an area of importance that needs a lot of
attention. The U.S. seems to have the lead in this area. The fundamental driver for robotics in the U.S. comes
from military programs and Department of Defense (DoD) interests. In Europe, Japan and Korea, these
drivers are social and economic factors. Robotics is viewed as an important industry, while Asians have
identified an important role for robots in an aging society.

FUTURE CHALLENGES

There are many unsolved problems and fundamental challenges for robotics. At a very high level, challenges
for industrial and service robotics can be categorized in the following areas.
• Manipulation and physical interaction with the real world: We need concerted modeling and control
efforts together with the development of good hardware to make arms and hands that can perform
anything but the simplest of pick-and-place operations that are prevalent in industry.
• Perception for unstructured environments: Most industrial robots have fairly primitive sensing and
perception is limited to 2D structured environments. A robot’s ability to perceive 3D environments and
take actions based on perception currently is limited to very simple tasks.
• Safety for operation near humans: Personal robots will have to operate in the vicinity of humans. Even
in industry, there are many applications now where robots and humans augment each others’ skills.
While industrial robotics has had a history of cordoning off robots and not allowing humans to enter
robotic work areas, this culture is changing. This means robots will need to be made safe. This in turn
leads to both hardware and software challenges.
• Human-robot interaction: Robotics applications call for humans operating in proximity to robots and
with robots as assistants to humans. The relevant understanding of human machine interaction mostly
comes from studies of human-computer interaction. Clearly robots, which perform physical work and
operate in a 3D world, are more than computers, and there is a definite need to develop this field further.
• Networks of robots, sensors, and users: Most current applications see a robot operating with a human
user or with a collection of sensors in a very structured environment in a pre-determined manner. With
the emergence of networked, embedded systems and the increased presence of networks in homes and in
factories, robots will need to work with other robots, learn from different types of sensors and interact
with different human users depending on their immediate environment. This is particularly true for
mobile robotic systems whose environments are constantly changing.

Finally, it is important to note that these challenges call for a concerted effort to develop physical
infrastructure (hardware) as well as a basic scientific research agenda. Most high-caliber robotics research
programs have a strong experimental program, and progress has been hampered by the lack of affordable
instrumentation in all these areas, but particularly in the area of dexterous manipulation.