We are going to install e 3rd party external 3PE device on an existing installation where a UR10e used, since we need a safer way to setup robot positions. We need to check the reliability of the related safety functions.
According the last UNI EN ISO 10218-2:2025, a similar functionality, requires:
1. a minimum PLr = c about the operative mode choosing (modal selector);
2. a minimum PLr = d about the 3PE (hold to run) functionality.
We checked the user manual of UR10e and the annexes as “pfhd-calculation-ur-robots-safety-system-31.pdf” and “URe-series_Functional_Safety_2022.pdf” but we didn’t catch specific PFHd data (according to ISO 13849-1) for the two overmentioned aspects.
Can somebody help us to find out the reliability data to edit the IFA SISTEMA Version 3.0.4 Build 3 calculator? Or, does someone have some specific experience/documentation to share about?
you are refering to the new ISO 10218-2:2025 standard and the fact that, according to this standard, PFH values for 3PE and operating mode change must also be specified.
According to the tables in the robot manual, all safety functions currently present on the robot have a PFH of 1.8E-07. However, the values requested by you are not mandatory in the current revision of the ISO standard and therefore have not yet been included in the robot documentation.
I can currently confirm that UR is working to adapt its range of robots to the updated standard as soon as possible, but I can also add that the updated standard will only become mandatory for robot manufacturers once it has been transposed and harmonised by the new Machinery Directive, which is likely to be published in 2027 (EU Official Journal for the EU Machinery Directive).
The ISO (or EN) standards are not mandatory but they describe the state-of-the art and help the demonstrate that the designer choose the best technical option. The 2025 version of the ISO 10218-2 is not yet harmonized but already in force. However, looking to the previous version EN ISO 10218-2:2011, the concepts related the so-called “Manual mode” were already described in §5.6.4 (in particular what involved our application “5.6.4.2 Manual reduced speed”) and there is also a remark “The safety-related control performance of the enabling function shall be in accordance with 5.2”. In § “5.2.2 Performance requirement” there is the following sentence “Safety-related parts of control systems shall be designed so that they comply with PL=d with structure category 3 as described in ISO 13849-1:2006, …”.
We need to revamp an existing machinery therefore the robot is a still existing UR10e unit (manufacturing year 2019) and obviously we don’t want to replace it; considering you wrote “According to the tables in the robot manual, all safety functions currently present on the robot have a PFH of 1.8E-07.”, may we assume that the PFH of 1.8E-07 is the right value we have to use for the overmentioned two safety functions (selection of operative mode and hold-to-run function by 3PE – or rather SS1 and SLS), regarding the controller subunit?
For future questions, please register on our myUR support portal at:
This forum is not directly monitored by UR support, so you may receive responses slowly or not at all.
On myUR, however, you can open tickets for software or hardware issues or general programming or installation questions, and you can be sure that you will be contacted as quickly as possible.
