Skip to main content
Orion Five Engineering

10 Jalan Kilang #04-05, Singapore 159410
+65 6100 5505

← All insights

Robotics

Autonomous mobile robots have a safety standard, but most sites do not design to it

ISO 3691-4 sets verification requirements for driverless industrial trucks, and ANSI/RIA R15.08 does the same for industrial mobile robots. A vendor demonstration shows that a robot can move around a site, but neither standard was written to test only that.

Terence Kok · 2026-01-20 · 4 min read

A small matte white machined mobile-robot chassis on four wheels, a single red ring forming its base bumper.

Executive summary

2020

the year ISO 3691-4 set safety and verification requirements for driverless industrial trucks

2

published parts of ANSI/RIA R15.08; a third, on user requirements, is still in development

Key conclusions

  • To a safety engineer, an autonomous mobile robot (AMR) is a driverless industrial truck, and that category has had a dedicated ISO standard since 2020.
  • ISO 3691-4 specifies verification methods, so a vendor should be able to produce the test report as well as the certificate.
  • Before the robot arrives on site, ask for the ISO 3691-4 or R15.08 Part 1 conformance evidence for the exact model and configuration in the quote.

To a safety engineer, an autonomous mobile robot moving through a warehouse or plant is a driverless industrial truck. Driverless industrial trucks have had a dedicated international standard since 2020: ISO 3691-4 sets the safety requirements and verification methods for this category of machine. Even so, most AMR deployments are still evaluated like a software rollout, on whether the robot completes the task. Whether it meets the standard written for it is rarely discussed.

In the United States, the equivalent standard is ANSI/RIA R15.08, which the Robotic Industries Association developed in parts. Part 1, approved in December 2020, defines the industrial mobile robot and recognises the autonomous mobile platform as one of three types. Part 2, published in 2023, covers the robot system and how it integrates with the rest of the facility. A third part, on user requirements, was still in development at the time of writing.

The standards set four requirements for vendors and integrators

  • A demonstrated stopping distance and hazard-detection zone that match the robot's actual speed and payload, as configured for your site.
  • Verification evidence beyond the declaration of conformity. ISO 3691-4 specifies test methods, so a vendor should be able to provide the test report as well as the certificate.
  • A clear boundary between what the robot manufacturer certified and what the integrator is responsible for once the robot is installed alongside your equipment. R15.08 deliberately divides this between its two published parts.
  • A documented approach to mixed traffic of people and robots, which is where most incident investigations start.

A trade-show demonstration does not test the conditions of a live site

A small white mobile robot inside a red-and-white taped hazard zone, a grey pallet nearby.

A trade-show demonstration runs in a controlled aisle, at a pace chosen to look good. The floor has no forklifts, pedestrians or shift-change traffic, which are the conditions the standard's hazard-zone requirements were written for. A live site has all of them.

Before signing anything, ask the vendor for the ISO 3691-4 verification report or the R15.08 Part 1 conformance evidence for the specific model and configuration in the quote. A standard's name in a brochure is not the same thing. If the vendor's answer is vague, you will know before the robot arrives on site.

Related insights


All insights

Related service


Book a scoping call