人机协作与人体工程学风险：人体测量学视角
Human-Humanoid Collaboration and Ergonomic Risk: An Anthropometric Perspective
AI总结：
研究从人体测量学角度，以ISO 7250为框架审视人机协作中的人体工程学风险。对六个当代人形机器人基准测试，发现部分ISO定义不适用于人形机器人，存在四种人体测量偏差模式，指出风险源于比例及与人体测量假设的差异，强调协作系统设计需人体测量学感知评估方法。
AI中文摘要：
人形机器人越来越多地部署在需要与人类工人进行密切身体互动的工业环境中。尽管这些系统通常按人体比例设计，但其形态受机械、控制和任务导向的约束，而非生物解剖学影响。本研究以ISO 7250为参考框架，从人体测量学角度审视人机协作中的人体工程学风险。对六个当代人形机器人基于外部可观察几何形状进行基准测试，评估地标可识别性、测量可行性和人体测量偏差的跨平台模式。结果表明，一些与生物解剖学相关的ISO定义地标和测量不适用于人形机器人，而许多几何和关节级尺寸仍可测量。跨平台观察到四种反复出现的人体测量偏差模式。这些发现表明人体工程学风险不仅源于比例，还源于人形身体与人的人体测量假设的差异。ISO 7250仍是有用参考框架，但直接应用于人形机器人有限，强调协作系统设计中需人体测量学感知评估方法。
英文摘要：
Humanoid robots are increasingly deployed in industrial environments where close physical interaction with human workers is expected. Although these systems are often designed at a human scale, their embodiment is shaped by mechanical, control, and task-oriented constraints rather than biological anatomy. This study examines ergonomic risk in human-humanoid collaboration from an anthropometric perspective using ISO 7250 as a reference framework. Six contemporary humanoid robots are benchmarked based on externally observable geometry to evaluate landmark identifiability, measurement feasibility, and cross-platform patterns of anthropometric deviation. Results show that several ISO-defined landmarks and measurements tied to biological anatomy are consistently inapplicable to humanoid robots, while many geometric and joint-level dimensions remain measurable. Four recurring patterns of anthropometric deviation are observed across platforms: additive, subtractive, exaggerative, and speculative. These findings indicate that ergonomic risk arises not from scale alone, but from how humanoid bodies diverge from human anthropometric assumptions. ISO 7250 remains a useful reference framework, but its direct transfer to humanoid robots is limited, underscoring the need for anthropometry-aware evaluation approaches in collaborative system design.
