Chevron Left
Collaborative Robot Safety: Design & Deployment に戻る

バッファロー大学(University at Buffalo) による Collaborative Robot Safety: Design & Deployment の受講者のレビューおよびフィードバック



As robots evolve and increasingly interact with humans, enhancing the safety of personnel working with these “collaborative robots” (cobots) is vital. This course equips you to assess the safety of a collaborative robot workcell and prevent the chances of injury or harm. It imparts industry-endorsed safety standards, technical report recommendations and best practices from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Robotic Industries Association (RIA) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Learners are introduced to similarities and differences between traditional robots, cobots and conventional machinery before delving into risk assessments, causes of robot accidents and collaborative applications. Material also includes key design techniques for reducing collision forces and a methodology for safety testing. Main concepts are delivered through videos, demos and hands-on exercises. To learn more, please watch the overview video by copying and pasting the following link into your web browser:



Jun 12, 2020

It was an excellent knowledge gathering exercise. The course was well structured and there is good level of guidance for learning and implementation in the course.


May 08, 2020

covers intermediate level of ISO 12100 safety of machinery standard with practical industrial examples of robots and new inoovative cobots


Collaborative Robot Safety: Design & Deployment: 26 - 37 / 37 レビュー

by Carlos E

Feb 25, 2020

Great course! My only complain is that some of the extra videos and material make no sense or the links are broken. I would have liked to have a few practical examples explained about workcell design rather than papers as extra material.


Nov 25, 2019

This course is quite good but only thing I felt uncomfortable is about standards taught as they are very tidious to remember

by Gabriel F

Oct 01, 2019

Very good information, tests were not proofread, but everything else was very helpful.

by David M

Aug 09, 2019

This course provides an excellent presentation of useful information and methods.

by Kedar H P

May 03, 2020

Please Provide more Visual notes and points like a slide show while speaking.

by Muslim A

Jun 24, 2020

Great Course and meet industry standards

by chanakya j

May 27, 2020

very good and useful content

by Siddharth M

Apr 29, 2020

good course


May 07, 2020


by Donald W

May 01, 2020

This is an interesting, informative course on a very specific subject. It gives a very good overview of the use of robots which interact in the same areas as people. However, the course appears to be orphaned. The forums point out a few dead links and exam question errors, but no one from the course has responded in over a year.

by Ankit S

May 30, 2020

The course was okay.

The instructor was good.

though, i expected to learn some programming for safety parameters which were not at all covered in this course. This is an improvement that i would suggest.

by Jessica N

Feb 17, 2020

The transcripts for the videos are clearly not reviewed and include word substitution errors that could possibly be made by software or by someone who has English as a second language and erroneously selected a similar-sounding word. In some cases, you can figure out what is trying to be conveyed, but in other cases it's pretty confusing. Some of the additional resources are just advertisements from companies trying to sell their robots. Some of the additional resources links don't work. Some of the questions in the quizzes make no sense, partly because of incorrect word substitutions. Other issues include a yes/no question in week 4 where the "yes" answer and the "no" answer each provided an explanation after either the yes or the no... but the yes and the no were attached to the wrong explanations, thus causing the answers to be illogical and false. Another question asks about an arm being pinned by a robot, but the answer it wants is the answer for the user's palm being pinned. The palm is mentioned in the question, but the arm is the part the question says is pinned- so the answer the test wants is not the answer the question asks. The video in week 4 is terrible, and doesn't really effectively answer the question associated with it.