A General Safety Framework for Autonomous Manipulation in Human Environments

SARA shield

Jakob Thumm, Julian Balletshofer, Leonardo Maglanoc, Luis Muschal, Matthias Althoff
School of Computation, Information and Technology, Technical University of Munich
Accepted for Publication in the IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 2026
SARA shield overview

SARA shield gives formal safety guarantees for autonomous robot manipulation in human environments while permitting fast robot speeds.

Abstract

Autonomous robots are projected to augment the manual workforce, especially in repetitive and hazardous tasks. For a successful deployment of such robots in human environments, it is crucial to guarantee human safety. State-of-the-art approaches to ensure human safety are either too restrictive to permit a natural human-robot collaboration or make strong assumptions that do not hold for autonomous robots, e.g., knowledge of a pre-defined trajectory.

We propose SARA shield, a power and force limiting framework for AI-based manipulation in human environments that gives formal safety guarantees while allowing for fast robot speeds. As recent studies have shown that unconstrained collisions allow for significantly higher contact forces than constrained collisions (clamping), we classify potential contacts by their collision type using reachability analysis. For each contact type, we then verify that the kinetic energy of the robot is below pain and injury thresholds for the respective human body part in contact.

Our real-world experiments show that SARA shield satisfies the contact safety constraints while completing collaborative tasks 15.9% faster than the best-performing state-of-the-art approach.

Video

Real-world demonstrations

Close-contact clamping — PFL

Close-contact clamping — SSM

RobCo assembly task — PFL

RobCo assembly task — SSM

PFL = power and force limiting, SSM = speed and separation monitoring.

How it works

In every control cycle, SARA shield runs the following loop:

  1. Long-term planner. A task-level planner produces an intended trajectory toward the next waypoint.
  2. Monitored trajectory planner. The shield blends the intended trajectory with a failsafe trajectory that brings the robot to a safe stop, producing a candidate monitored trajectory.
  3. Reachability analysis. The shield computes over-approximative reachable sets for the human and the robot over the planning horizon and detects all possible contacts.
  4. Contact classification. Each potential contact is classified as constrained (clamping) or unconstrained using reachability analysis. Remaining contacts are treated as unconstrained, which allows significantly higher contact forces.
  5. Energy verification. The shield checks that the kinetic energy of the robot at every potential contact is below the pain and injury thresholds of the affected body part for the detected contact type. If verification succeeds, the monitored trajectory is executed; otherwise the robot continues on the last verified monitored trajectory.

Benchmark tasks

We evaluate SARA shield on five collaborative manipulation tasks. The full ablation is reproducible from the ablation-study branch.

RobCo assembly task

RobCo assembly

Stacking task

Stacking

Tower task

Tower

Puzzle task

Puzzle

Screwing task

Screwing

Ablation results

Mean and standard deviation of the robot efficiency (percentage of the reference trajectory covered without a safety shield) and per-step computation time across 30 trials. Higher efficiency is better. The p-value tests H1: that each baseline matches SARA shield in efficiency; small p-values indicate that SARA shield is significantly better. The last column marks whether the method is provably safe under the assumptions of Sec. III-D of the paper.

Schunk LWA 4P

Method Efficiency per end-effector type [%] p-value of H1 Computation time [ms] Provably safe
Blunt Sharp Mean 99.9th pct.
SSM zone [63]6.8 ± 10.76.8 ± 10.78.14e-120.120.95
Reduced-speed PFL [63]33.9 ± 9.833.9 ± 9.88.14e-120.141.20
Dynamic SSM [8, 20]59.2 ± 19.759.2 ± 19.78.14e-120.150.95
Reduced-speed zone [9]62.2 ± 15.862.2 ± 15.88.14e-120.271.48
Reflected mass [13]83.4 ± 3.480.4 ± 5.11.10e-110.623.37
SARA shield w/o cfree82.3 ± 13.182.3 ± 7.88.15e-120.473.07
SARA shield (ours)92.6 ± 6.392.5 ± 6.20.503.39

Franka Emika

Method Efficiency per end-effector type [%] p-value of H1 Computation time [ms] Provably safe
Blunt Sharp Mean 99.9th pct.
SSM zone [63]7.0 ± 11.17.0 ± 11.18.13e-120.111.24
Reduced-speed PFL [63]2.7 ± 3.42.7 ± 3.48.13e-120.091.34
Dynamic SSM [8, 20]76.0 ± 20.676.0 ± 20.68.13e-120.110.63
Reduced-speed zone [9]55.4 ± 27.755.4 ± 27.78.13e-120.162.44
Reflected mass [13]75.9 ± 1.971.1 ± 5.01.10e-110.282.67
SARA shield w/o cfree89.8 ± 9.288.9 ± 9.48.15e-120.312.92
SARA shield (ours)92.3 ± 9.092.3 ± 8.90.322.99

Reference numbers in brackets refer to the bibliography of the paper. PFL = power and force limiting, SSM = speed and separation monitoring.

Code

SARA shield is implemented in C++ with Python bindings and is available at github.com/TUMcps/sara-shield. The repository contains the safety shield, example configurations for the Franka Emika Panda and other robots, the SaRA reachability library as a submodule, and a unit-test suite with coverage reporting. See the README for build instructions and a quick-start example.

Related publications

BibTeX

@article{thumm_2026_GeneralSafety,
  title   = {A General Safety Framework for Autonomous Manipulation in Human Environments},
  author  = {Thumm, Jakob and Balletshofer, Julian and Maglanoc, Leonardo and Muschal, Luis and Althoff, Matthias},
  journal = {IEEE Transactions on Robotics},
  year    = {2026},
  note    = {Accepted for publication},
  url     = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.10180}
}