CFE Media and Technology Robotics Research Report November 2019 Table of contents
Section Page
Introduction and methodology 3
Key findings 4
Respondent profile 5-10
Robots, components, software, use 11-24
Robotic safety, training 25-30
Robotic purchase, specification 31-37 Robotic spending, timing, 38-45 manufacturers Additional resources 46 Introduction and methodology
Objective The study was conducted by Control Engineering and Plant Engineering to identify trending information as it relates to the buying and specifying habits of engineering professionals involving robotics.
Sample The sample was selected from qualified subscribers of Control Engineering and Plant Engineering with valid email addresses who purchase, specify or use robotics.
Method Subscribers were sent an email asking them to participate in this study. The email included a URL linked to the questionnaire. ▪ Data collected: August 23, 2019, through September 21, 2019 ▪ Number of respondents: 22 from Plant Engineering and 96 from Control Engineering o Margin of error: +/- 9.0% at a 95% confidence level ▪ Incentive: Survey participants were offered the opportunity to enter a drawing for a chance to receive a $100 VISA gift card. Summary of findings
Key findings follow about respondents’ involvement with robotics. Also see a separate article with write-in advice from survey respondents, in the December 2019 Robotics Special Report from Control Engineering and Plant Engineering.
Robots, components, software, use About 70% of respondents buy or specify robots; many other products and services go with that, including robot or vision sensors; robot grippers; robot software; robots as part of a larger machine system or workcell, robot control panels and enclosures and more than another dozen related products or services. Software and controllers: For open-source robot programming software, 27% said they use or would use; 31% said a controller from a third-party manufacturer guides robot movement. Forty-seven percent of respondents have material handling/conveying applications; 34% said they have pick-and-place applications.
Robotic safety, training Just 9% find unaccepted safety risk associated with robots; 4% isn’t being addressed. Of respondents 56% don’t think those involved with robots get enough safety training. Of that 14% could use a lot more. Consultants provide the most training (54%), compared to other robotic trainers (24%), RIA-certified integrators (21%), RIA online (17%), and other robotic system integrators (13%). Depending on position, 53% to 70% receive a sufficient or above average amount of robot training.
Robotic purchase, specification Just 12% have one or more predetermined vendors. Extremely and fairly important decisions for purchase or specification include safety devices (88%), throughput (87%), avoiding downtime (86%), and quality (86%). Throughput (64%) and quality (52%) are the largest purchasing reasons. Financing and justification are top obstacles to purchasing (42% each);
Robotic spending, timing More than half expect their next robot purchase within a year. One-third of respondents said their next robot purchase is within the next six months; 4% within a year; 75% would or might change vendors. Respondent profile: Robotics Research Report Primary job function
Process, Production or Manufacturing Engineering 26%
System or Product Design, Control or Instrument Engineering 20%
System Integration or Consulting 15%
General or Corporate Management 14%
Operations or Maintenance 11%
Other 8%
Other Engineering* 7%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
Q: What is your primary job function? (n=74) *Other Engineering includes: Evaluation, QC, Standards, Reliability, Test, Project, Software, Plant, Electrical, Mechanical or Electronic Primary business (continued on next page)
Automotive and Other Transportation Equipment Mfg 12% Machinery Mfg 11% System Integration, Consulting, Business or Technical Services 9% Miscellaneous or Other Mfg 7% Instrumentation, Control Systems, Test, Measurement or Medical Equipment Mfg 7% Computers, Communications, Consumer Electronics and Electronic Product Mfg 7% Fabricated Metal Mfg 6% Food, Beverage, Tobacco Mfg 5% Other 4% Utilities including Electric, Gas, Water & Waste and Telecommunications 4% Plastics & Rubber Mfg 4% Pharmaceutical Mfg 4%
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%
Q::What is the primary business at your location? (n=118) Primary business (continued; note: scale changed from prior page)
Aircraft, Aerospace or Defense Mfg 3% Primary Metal Mfg 3% Plant/Facilities Engineering or Maintenance Services 2% Oil, Gas and Petroleum, including Refining 2% Mining & Mineral Product Mfg 2% Distribution Centers, Warehousing 2% Chemical Mfg 2% Wood, Paper Mfg and Related Printing Activities 1% Textiles, Apparel and Leather Products Mfg 1% Information, Data Processing or Software and Services 1% Government or Military 1% Electrical Equipment, Appliance and Component Mfg 1% Agriculture or Construction 1%
0% 1% 1% 2% 2% 3% 3% 4%
Q: What is the primary business at your location? (n=118) Facility size
40% 38%
35%
30%
25%
20% 18% 16% 15% 15% 12% 10%
5% 1% 0% Fewer than 100 100 to 249 250 to 499 500 to 999 1,000 or more Don't know
Q: How many people work at your location? (n=74) Location
East North New Central England 28% 3% West North Central Middle 4% Atlantic Mountain 9% 6% East Pacific South South 16% Atlantic Central 21% West South 5% Central 8% Robots, components, software, use: Robotics Research Report Types of robots or related components purchased or specified
Articulated robots 72%
*Collaborative robots that are industrial robots applied or modified for use in a collaborative way 32%
Gantry robots 28% Mobile robots, used for material transport, warehousing, fulfillment, and services, including machine tending 28% Collaborative robots (by design speed or force limiting in such a way as to minimize risk to humans) 28%
Cartesian robots 28%
Selective compliant articulated robot arm (SCARA) robots 15% Drones with autonomous capabilities (a type of mobile robot). Remotely controlled drones are not robots and are not covered here. 9% Parallelogram robots [including Delta**] 5%
Other robot types 3%
Robotic exoskeletons for assembly, logistics, or to decrease risk from repetitive movement or lifting 3%
Hybrid of above robot types 3%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Q: What types of robots or related components, devices and/or services do you buy or specify? Check all that apply (N=116) *Modified with appropriate speed/force limiting software applied, padding, safety sensors. ** “including Delta" was not included in the survey, but is included here for explanation. Number of robots
40% 35% 35%
30%
25% 20% 20%
15% 11% 11% 10% 8% 5% 5% 4% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 1 to 5 6 to 10 11 to 25 Don't know 26 to 50 More than 1,000 101 to 250 51 to 75 76 to 100 251 to 500 501 to 750 751 to 1,000
Q: About how many robots (units) do you have operating on site—or sites for which you’re responsible (N=75)? (N=75) Robots, software, components, training purchased or specified
Robots 71% Robot tending or conveyor devices 39%
Robot sensors or vision 64% Robot maintenance 39%
Robot sensors 64% Robot linear guides and motors 37%
Robot grippers 59% Robotic training 36%
Robot software 52% Robotic integration (hire others) 34% Robotics as part of a larger machine, system, or Robot wiring or harnesses 33% workcell 50% Robot control panels and enclosures 49% Robot pendants 30%
Robotic integration (self) 45% Robot mounting pads and devices 25%
Robot power supply 45% Other robotic components 3%
Robot effectors (end-of-arm tooling or EOAT) 45% Other robot services 2%
Robot safety cages, devices and systems 41% Robot leasing 1%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
Q: Which robotic devices, systems or services do you buy or specify? Check all that apply. (N=118)) Robot-related software
Robot communications 67% 25% 14% Robot programming based on moving robot arm (move to teach) 62% 14% 29% Robot safety software 56% 24% 28% Robot setup and programming wizards 55% 17% 30% Robot simulation and training 53% 19% 34% Robot analytics 50% 15% 41% Robot programming and simulation and training, integrated 46% 24% 34% Robot programming G code 44% 21% 40% Robot programming based on function-block or flow-charts 42% 22% 42% Robot kinematic libraries 40% 12% 51% Universal robot programming software that can program robot and surrounding axes of motion 35% 25% 47% Robot remote asset management/diagnostics services software (cloud) 30% 15% 58% Robot artificial intelligence (AI/machine learning) 29% 20% 54% Integrated cybersecurity 20% 26% 58%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Robot manufacturer Third-party distributor or other organization Not in use/Not applicable
Q: For the robots that you buy/specify, what robot-related software is in use and who is the software provider? Check all that apply for each row and column. (N=113) *Modified with appropriate speed/force limiting software applied, padding, safety sensors Open-source robot programming software; controllers
60% Open-source robot programming software 47% 40% 17% 17% 20% 10% 10% 0% We know of it and haven't used We know of it and have used We would like more We don't know of it and would We don't know of it and information use wouldn't use
Robot controller 80% 79% 60% 40% 31% 20% 3% 3% 0% From robot manufacturer From third-party factory controller Other Don’t know manufacturer*
Q Top: Regarding open source robot programming software… (N=114) Q Bottom: What robot controller do you use? Check all that apply. (N=116) *PLC, PAC, industrial PC, embedded controller Robot data exchange
23%
5% 72%
Yes No Don't know
Q: Should there be a standard for robot data exchange used in every robot to make information more useful in a multiple robot facility? (N=75) Robot features (continued on next page)
Accuracy 60% Cost, capital 45% Cost, lifecycle (including installation, integration, maintenance, energy) 41% Ease of programming 34% Communications with other robotics or systems 27% Repeatability 24% Ease of integration with other systems 20% Ease of use 17% Ease of repair/maintenance 16% Flexibility (easy redeployment) 15% Parts availability 14% Ease of installation 13% Speed/short cycle time 10% Reach 10% Payload size 10% Arm path optimization 10% Predictive maintenance (advanced warning prior to repair) 9% Delivery time 9% Teach/operator pendant 8% Safety zone 8%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Q: Which robot features are most important to you? Check all that apply… (N=86) Robot features (continued; note: scale changed from prior page)
Mobile robot integrated with robot arm 7% Computer numerical control (CNC)-robot software integration 7% Arm path conflict resolution 7% Ease of integration with other axes of motion 6% Safe stop without power off 5% Mobility and navigation 3% Maintenance reminders 3% Environment: wash down 3% Teach/operator pendant wireless 2% Jitter/vibration control 2% Environment: clean room 2% Dual-arm capability 2% Wear-based compensation to maintain accuracy 1% Touch/force limiting (collaborative mode near humans) 1% Peripheral availability 1% Environment: heat 1% Environment: explosive atmosphere 1%
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8%
Q: Which robot features are most important to you? Check all that apply. (N=86) Robot applications (continued next page)
Material handling/conveying 47%
Pick and place 34%
Machine vision visible light 31%
Assembly, light 31%
Packaging 29%
Palletizing 28%
Welding 22%
Machine tending (stationary) 17%
Assembly, medium 17%
Identification and sorting 16%
Mobile robot (parts delivery) 15%
Quality control 13%
Machine vision 3-D 13%
CNC operations 13%
Assembly, heavy 12%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
Q: Which robot applications are in use? (N=118) Robot applications (continued; note: scale changed from prior page)
Machine vision infrared 10% Assembly, electronics 10% 3-D additive manufacturing 10% Grinding 9% Filling 9% Mobile robot (machine tending) 8% Other 7% Painting 6% Mobile robot (warehousing) 6% Mobile robot autonomous forklift 5% Mobile robot order fulfillment 3% Mobile autonomous drone industrial mapping 3% Mobile autonomous drone industrial inventory 3% Bottling 3% Buffing 2%
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 10%
Q: Which robot applications are in use? (N=118) Robot installation and integration
70%
60% 58% 51% 50%
40%
30% 22% 20% 14% 10% 7% 7% 2% 0% Our staff Robotic system Robot manufacturer Consultant Distributor Other contractor Other integrators under contract
Q: How will you install or integrate your next robot into your existing line/system/process? Check all that apply (N=98) Challenges with existing robots
Lack of skilled operators 19% 31% 31% 18%
Financing 17% 21% 21% 42%
Predictive monitoring 14% 36% 21% 29%
Justification 14% 36% 22% 27%
Integration 13% 38% 35% 14%
Reliability 12% 30% 35% 23%
Maintenance 12% 35% 35% 18%
Flexibility 9% 36% 35% 19%
Ease of use 8% 35% 40% 17%
Training 6% 31% 42% 21%
Safety 6% 34% 32% 27%
Installation 6% 31% 35% 27%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Definitely a challenge A challenge Somewhat of a challenge Not a challenge
Q: What are some challenges with existing robots in place? (N=78) Note: Some bars do not total 100% due to rounding. Robot redeployment: Frequency, reason
30% 26% Robot redeployment frequency 25% 20% 15% 15% 15% 9% 9% 10% 7% 6% 5% 5% 3% 2% 2% 0% Don’t know Once every 5 years Other Once a year Once every 2 years Monthly Twice per year Daily Each shift Weekly Quarterly
Robot redeployment reason 50% 49% 40% 30% 29% 20% 10% 12% 10% 0% As workflow requires Until the line is reconfigured Until the current order is complete Other
Q Top: How often do you usually redeploy a robot in a different location/application? (N=86) Q: Bottom: How often do you expect to redeploy the robot the robot in a different location/application (by job)? (N=86)) Robotic safety, training: Robotics Research Report Robotic safety, risk
80% 73% 70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20% 17%
10% 5% 4%
0% Appropriate level of risk Excessively low level of risk constricting Unacceptable level of risk and being Unacceptable level of risk and not workflow addressed addressed
Q: What is your impression of robotic safety at your location, or the areas over which you have influence? (N=98) Robot safety program integration
35% 31% 30% 30%
25%
20% 20% 19%
15%
10%
5%
0% Integrated Somewhat integrated Separate Mostly integrated
Q: At your location, is robot safety separate from or integrated with other safety programs? (N=98) Robot safety training: Enough?
45% 40% 40%
35% 34%
30%
25%
20%
15% 14%
10% 8%
5% 4%
0% They get enough Could use a little more Could use a lot more No Don’t know
Q: Do most of the individuals involved with robots in your facility-or that you have responsibility for in more than one site- get enough robotic safety training? (N=98) Robot training by position
Robot programmer 18% 48% 22% 1% 10%
Robot maintenance staff 13% 40% 30% 6% 11%
Robot operator 13% 51% 21% 6% 8%
Robot integrator/installer 12% 58% 15% 2% 12%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Above Average Sufficient Minimal Poor Don’t Know
Q: For each of the following positions, please indicate the amount of training received (N=98) Note: Some bars do not total 100% due to rounding. Robot training sources
60% 54%
50%
40%
30% 24% 21% 20% 17% 13% 10%
0% Consultants Other robotic trainers RIA-certified integrators Robotic Industries Other robotic system Association (RIA) Online integrators
Q: Which sources does your facility use for robot training? Check all that apply (N=98) Robotic purchase, specification: Robotics Research Report Reach: Robotics purchase or specification involvement
43% 57%
Yes, for one location Yes, for multiple locations
Q: Are you involved in the purchase or specification of robots or robotics hardware, software, services or training for one or more locations? (N=118) Who decides? Robotics purchase or specification decisions
I help specify (contribute information to the decision) 25%
I decide as a team member 13%
My department or company purchases from one or more already determined vendor(s) 12%
I decide after collaborating with my department team 12%
I decide after collaborating with a cross-functional team 10%
I decide 10%
I specify after collaborating with a cross-functional team 8%
I specify (write the requirements to make the decision) 8%
I specify after collaborating with my department team 3%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
Q: Which of the following most closely represents how does the buying/specifying decision work for robotics at your company? (N=77) Factors: Robotic purchase or specification decisions
Avoiding downtime 55% 31% 6% 8% Throughput 52% 35% 5% 8% Return on investment (ROI) 52% 32% 8% 8% Quality improvements 43% 43% 5% 9% Safety devices 40% 48% 8% 4% Initial capital cost 40% 42% 14% 4% Decrease repetitive injury or lifting injury risk 38% 32% 16% 14% Safety training 38% 35% 18% 9% Lifecycle costs 34% 43% 13% 10% Integration cost 34% 45% 16% 5% Bottlenecks 32% 35% 18% 14% Maintenance costs 25% 49% 19% 6% Worker compensation claim reduction 22% 30% 26% 22% Workforce: Do what we cannot find workers to do 22% 34% 22% 22% Training costs 17% 42% 29% 13% Workforce: Help attract needed workers 13% 32% 26% 29%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Extremely important Fairly important Somewhat important Not important
Q: How important is each of the following factors to your specification/purchase of a robot? (N=77) Robot purchase reasons
Increase throughput 64% Increase quality 52% Eliminate one or more bottleneck(s) 30% Do dangerous things that increase risk to workers 30% Do things we cannot hire people to do 28% Save jobs by increasing competitiveness, market share to keep the facility running 27% Do dull things workers usually don't want to do 27% Do dirty things workers usually don't want to do 19% Eliminate jobs 13% Use displaced workers other needed areas 8% Other 7% Don't know 6% Inspire the workforce 5%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Q: What are reasons behind your next robot purchase? Check all that apply (N=86) Robot purchasing obstacles
45% 42% 42% 40%
35%
30% 29% 25% 25% 25% 22% 20% 17% 17% 17% 15% 14% 14% 12% 10% 9%
5% 3%
0%
Q: What obstacles are there in your next robot purchase? (N=77) Robot purchasing: Communication, training, incentives
100%
90% 87%
80% 70% 70% 63% 60%
50%
40% 37% 30% 30%
20% 13% 10%
0% Offer (or receive) communication about the robot's Offer (or receive) training or retraining to/for Offer incentives related to post-robotic productivity purpose and role? workers before the robot arrives? for those involved?
Yes No
Q: For your next robot purchase, do you expect to... (N=75) Robotic spending, timing, manufacturers: Robotics Research Report Spending for robotics purchasing
30% 27%
25%
20% 19%
15% 15%
11% 10% 9% 7% 5% 5% 4% 4%
0% Don't know $250,001 to $50,001 to $100,001 to Less than $25,000 More than $1 $25,000 to $500,001 to $750,001 to $1 $500,000 $100,000 $250,000 million $50,000 $750,000 million
Q: In the next 12 months, approximately how much will your location (or company, if your buy/specify influence extends beyond one location) purchase in robot hardware, software, integration and services (including maintenance)? (N=75) *Total is 101 due to rounding Time frames for robot purchases
30%
25% 24%
21% 20%
15% 12% 12%
10% 9% 9% 8%
5% 4%
0% Don't know Within the next 6 Within the next 1 Within the next 3 Within the next Within the next 18 Within the next 12 Not for at least 2 to 12 months to 3 months to 6 months month to 24 months to 18 months years
Q: When is your next robot purchase? (N=75) Vendor loyalty for robot purchases
50%
45% 43% 40%
35% 32% 30% 25% 20% 19% 15%
10% 7% 5% 0% Yes Maybe No Don't know
Q: Are you willing and able to consider a different vendor for your next robot purchase? (N=75) Vendor manufacturers: Number used
35%
31% 30% 29%
25%
20%
15% 15%
10% 8% 7% 7%
5% 3% 1% 0% 2 1 4 3 5 Don't know 6 to 10 11 to 15
Q: How many robot manufacturers are represented among those? (N=75) Robot brand awareness (continued on next slide)
Fanuc 41% 20% 30% 9% ABB Robots 33% 26% 31% 10% Yaskawa Motoman 19% 21% 43% 18% Universal Robots (Teradyne) 17% 6% 37% 41% Yamaha 13% 10% 48% 29% Mitsubishi Robotics (Mitsubishi Electric) 11% 19% 47% 23% Kuka (Midea Group) 10% 23% 26% 41% Epson (Seiko Epson) 10% 10% 42% 38% Bosch 10% 16% 47% 27% Denso Robotics 9% 10% 47% 34% Comau (Fiat Chrysler Automobiles) 9% 3% 28% 60% Omron Automation 7% 14% 54% 25% Festo 7% 11% 47% 34% Toshiba Robotics (Toshiba Corp.) 6% 10% 51% 33% Omron Adept 6% 16% 36% 42% Igus 6% 4% 21% 69% Apex Automation & Robotics 6% 4% 28% 62% Schunk 4% 7% 29% 59% B+M Surface Systems 4% 4% 10% 81% Aurotek 4% 3% 16% 77% Hyundai Robotics 3% 10% 36% 51% Delta Electronics 3% 38% 59%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Currently use Formerly used Aware of but never used Not familiar
Q: To what extent are you familiar with the following robot manufacturers, prior to seeing them listed on this questionnaire? (N=70) Robot brand awareness (continued)
Swisslog (Swisslog Holding AG) 3%1% 16% 80% Rethink Robotics 3% 4% 26% 66% Nachi-Fujikoshi 3% 7% 26% 63% Kawasaki Robotics 3% 9% 57% 31% IGM 3% 15% 82% Wittmann Battenfeld Group 1%1% 16% 81% ST Robotics 1% 4% 12% 83% Staubli 1% 12% 32% 55% Mobile Industrial Robots (MiR, Teradyne) 1%3% 20% 75% Doosan Robotics (Doosan Corp.) 1%1% 34% 63% AUBO Robotics 1% 4% 13% 81% Aethon 1%1% 25% 72% Vecna 4% 12% 84% Techman Robot (Quanta Storage) 3% 13% 84% TAL Brabo (Tata) 1% 14% 84% Siasun (Shanghai Siasun Robot & Automation Co.) 1% 13% 85% Mecademic 1% 17% 81% Kawada (Kawada Group) 3% 19% 78% Hit Robot Group (HRG) 12% 88% Hanwha Techwin (Hanwha Group) 4% 12% 84% Gudel 10% 21% 69% Franka 1% 12% 87% Fetch Robotics 1% 19% 79%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Currently use Formerly used Aware of but never used Not familiar
Q: To what extent are you familiar with the following robot manufacturers, prior to seeing them listed on this questionnaire? (N=70) Sources to aid in the purchase and specification of robots
Robot supplier/vendor websites 45% 30% 22% 3%
Robot system integrators 40% 41% 15% 4%
Robot supplier/vendor representatives 36% 40% 22% 3%
Trade publication websites 25% 33% 29% 14%
Trade publications 22% 40% 23% 15%
RIA standards 21% 35% 26% 18%
Robotic Industries Association (RIA) website 19% 32% 32% 17%
Robot supplier/vendor enewsletters 18% 37% 32% 14%
RIA training 13% 30% 36% 21%
Trade publication enewsletters 11% 35% 31% 24%
RIA newsletter 7% 31% 39% 23%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Highly valuable Moderately valuable Somewhat valuable Limited in value
Q: Please indicate how valuable each of the following sources is when obtaining information to help you specify or purchase robots: (N=74) Additional resources
Thank you for downloading the Control Engineering and Plant Engineering 2019 Robotics Report! Use the links below to access additional information on related news, products and research.
News, articles, products ▪ Discrete manufacturing Editorial research studies ▪ Mechatronics ▪ 2019 Career & Salary Study ▪ Machine safety ▪ 2018 Programmable Controllers ▪ Motors, drives ▪ 2018 HMI Hardware & Software ▪ Sensors, vision ▪ 2018 ERP, IIoT & the Cloud ▪ Robotics ▪ Additional studies: www.controleng.com/research ▪ CNC, motion control Contact information ▪ New Products for Engineers Amanda Pelliccione Director of Research Online training [email protected] ▪ CFE Edu Mark T. Hoske ▪ Upcoming webcasts Content Manager ▪ On demand webcasts [email protected] Note of thanks: To Hemdeep Kaur, CFE Media Audience Resources Database Technician, for work on this research report. Thanks also to ▪ Global System Integrator Database other staff and to the Robotic Industries Association (RIA) or ▪ Case studies reviewing the survey questions. ▪ Ebooks ▪ Newsletters ▪ White papers Contact Us: CFE Media and Technology www.cfemedia.com