INSIDER CASE STUDY: WHY TURNING OFF A HUMANOID DOESN'T MAKE IT SAFE
An actively balanced robot does not become safe simply by turning it off. If the control system fails, it loses its balance and falls. This is precisely where the difference lies compared to a traditional industrial robot: For a machine that is firmly bolted to the floor, a safe stop is generally also the safe state. This is no longer true for a humanoid or other dynamically stable robot. Safe Torque Off, the standard response in industrial safety technology, can actually create the very danger it is meant to prevent.
A separate standard is currently being developed to address this gap. In the latest episode of our video series “Insider Case Study,” Dieter Volpert, Senior Functional Safety Engineer at Synapticon, explains what the standards committee is working on and what robot manufacturers can do right now.
A STANDARD FOR ROBOTS THAT CAN FALL OVER
Under the designation ISO 25785-1, the ISO/TC 299/WG 12 working group is developing a standard for dynamically stable industrial mobile robots. The scope of the standard covers industrial environments; residential and consumer environments are expressly excluded. Its structure is similar to that of ISO 10218: one part covers the robot itself, and a second part covers its integration into the specific application.
The most difficult question here is not how to stop the robot. It is how the machine should behave in the event of a malfunction, a power failure, or a loss of stability. This is because the standard response—shutting everything down—can create a new hazard instead of eliminating an existing one.
That is why risk assessment plays such a prominent role in this thesis. A robust method is needed to assess just how dangerous a specific robot actually is. Factors such as weight, speed, and the location of the center of gravity are crucial in this regard. Only then can the safety functions that a system actually requires be determined.
WHERE WE'RE INVOLVED
Synapticon is participating in this standardization process. Dieter Volpert represents us at the working group meetings; most recently, he attended the meeting in Minneapolis in September 2026.
We contribute to the safety architecture on two levels: POSITRON Safety AI provides the safety controller layer, and through our engineering services, we support customers in risk assessment and system design, which will serve as the foundation for subsequent certification.
WHY IT MATTERS NOW
It is not possible to obtain certification against an unpublished standard. However, it is certainly possible to design a system according to its requirements. That is the key point: Those who wait until the standard is published lose development time. Those who design their system today in accordance with the draft requirements will be ready the day certification becomes possible.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
What does ISO 25785-1 cover?
ISO 25785-1 is a standard currently under development for dynamically stable industrial mobile robots—that is, machines that must actively maintain their balance. It is being developed by the ISO/TC 299/WG 12 working group and is structured similarly to ISO 10218, with one part covering the robot and another covering its integration.
Why isn't Safe Torque Off sufficient for a humanoid robot?
Safe Torque Off cuts off torque to the drives. An industrial robot bolted to the floor will then come to a stop. An actively balanced robot, however, loses its stability as a result and falls. The safety feature can thus become a source of danger itself.
What can robot manufacturers do before the standard is published?
You can't obtain certification based on an unpublished design, but you can build it. If you align the risk assessment and safety architecture with the design requirements today, you can obtain certification as soon as it becomes possible, rather than having to retrofit the system afterward.
More about the platform: POSITRON Safety AI
