International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) (2020) 14:1085–1089

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-020-00682-9

SHORT ORIGINAL PAPER

Effective integration of Cobots and additive manufacturing

for reconfigurable assembly solutions of biomedical products
Filippo Rossi1 · Fabio Pini1   · Andrea Carlesimo1 · Enrico Dalpadulo1   · Francesco Blumetti1 ·
Francesco Gherardini1   · Francesco Leali1 

Received: 1 July 2020 / Accepted: 24 July 2020 / Published online: 3 August 2020
© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2020

Abstract
Collaborative robotics and additive manufacturing are two enabling technologies of the Industry 4.0 manufacturing paradigm.
Their synergic integration requires novel and effective design approaches, aiming to the development of new reconfigurable
solutions for customised processes and products. This work presents an integrated approach that exploits the capabilities
of Cobots to mimic the repetitive and exhausting operator’s movements as well as the competitive advantages offered by
additive manufacturing to realize tailored equipment. In particular, the case study shows the development of a customised
device for the manipulation of biomedical components by means of a Cobot, which is introduced in a workstation to replace
manual operations. Moreover, the flexibility and the effectiveness of a Cobot can be improved thanks to customised devices
for gripping and pick-and-place operations based on a specific application. During the development phase, we simulated the
assembly process, and tested different options. The final configuration, with conformal circuits and suction cups, can pick,
manipulate and assembly the biomedical components, and thanks to a Fused Filament Fabrication technology is additively
manufactured. In conclusion, this developed prototypal solution proves the real capabilities offered by integrating Cobots
and additive manufacturing for the lean automation of a biomedical workstation.

Keywords  Design approach · Collaborative robot · Additive manufacturing · Biomedical components · Industry 4.0

1 Scenario

The use of automation in a production or assembly line

arises from the possibility of improving the manufacturing
process thanks to faster and more repeatable operations, or
* Francesco Gherardini
francesco.gherardini@unimore.it to avoid human errors. Specifically, automated lines with
robots serve over several shifts, providing 24-hour working
Filippo Rossi
filippo.rossi@unimore.it coverage and manage mixed production batches with high
quality standards, thanks to the inherent repeatability and
Fabio Pini
fabio.pini@unimore.it flexibility of industrial robots.
Therefore, when the first industrial robots were intro-
Andrea Carlesimo
andrea.carlesimo@unimore.it duced in the production lines, their primary goal was to
replace most workers. This situation caused an enormous
Enrico Dalpadulo
enrico.dalpadulo@unimore.it change in terms of plant organization and layout, while the
significant cost related to these installations were sustainable
Francesco Blumetti
francesco.blumetti@unimore.it only for medium batches production of the same products.
In recent years, however, with the introduction of col-
Francesco Leali
francesco.leali@unimore.it laborative robots (Cobots) [1], we have returned to the ini-
tial concept of machine-worker collaboration. The choice of
1
Department of Engineering “Enzo Ferrari”, University Cobots shows many advantages.
of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Via Vivarelli 10,
41125 Modena, Italy

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

1086 International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) (2020) 14:1085–1089
1. Their installation is not invasive as they do not require a
dedicated protection cabin to ensure the safety of people;
in fact, the Cobot itself guarantees the safety require-
ments [2].
2. A Cobot allows to create “open” work areas, giving the
possibility to let men and machines work in symbiosis.
3. A Cobot has an excellent degree of flexibility for future
changes to the production lines.
4. Moreover, the initial investment cost is relatively lower
compared to a fully automated production line.
A Cobot interacts directly with the user, thanks to a com-
pletely different approach than conventional rigid robotics.
One of the major advantages brought by collaborative robot-
ics, even if it is still one of the least understood, is that of
being able to be a meeting point of the skills expressed by
operators and robots.
The applications using Cobots show precision, repeat-
ability and productivity (typically attributable to automation
solutions) but also problem solving, creative ability, know-
how, which are instead a legacy and a genuinely human
contribution. Cobots are therefore the collectors capable of
bringing a fundamental human component back to the centre
of the industrial process, essential to respond effectively to
the continuous search for product customisation [3]. This
scenario, so briefly described, takes the name of Industry
4.0, or the evolutionary step that, from the pushed integra-
tion of automation processes, passes to the sharing of spaces,
skills, activities between men and machines and which
gives rise to an open and more compact layout. However,
industry 4.0 includes other technologies, such as Additive
Manufacturing (AM), whose integration may face further
issues, leading to additional benefits [4–6] and opening to
co-designed and customised single parts or small batches
[7–10]. This paper demonstrates the effective change toward
Fig. 1  Comparison of the workspaces
13
lean production by means of an approach based on the syner-
gic integration of Cobots and AM. The use case adopted to
validate the approach is a biomedical assembly workstation,
which is summarized in the next section. Section 3 details
the development of the component-based additively manu-
factured device for picking, manipulating and assembling
the components. Final remarks close the paper.
2 Automation of a biomedical workstation
The automation of manual processes must account for many
factors, in particular the constraints related to both the work-
space and the shape constraints of the components to be
manipulated (see Sect. 3) [11]. The reasons previously men-
tioned are even more important for those industrial scenarios
that require a very low level of waste and high product qual-
ity, as in the case of the biomedical field. Large adoption of
manual assembly ensures fast adaptation to small batches.
Nevertheless, the possibility of a human error (e.g., distrac-
tion, repetitiveness of movements, fatigue) in the assembly
sequence may cause the final rejection of a product or the
entire batch, especially for biomedical products. Conse-
quently, a human and robot collaborative solution was cho-
sen for the automation of a workstation for the assembly of
a dialysis fluid filter, which is a widespread product of the
biomedical industry. Cobots can be easily integrated into
existing production by automating repetitive tasks and thus
redistributing the workforce in more qualifying ones [12]. To
account for production constraints, the original workspace
(Fig. 1a) is firstly analysed to identify the correct automated
solution with the introduction of a Cobot (Fig. 1b) in the area
in which the operator previously worked. The manual work-
station showed recurrent errors related to the orientation of
International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) (2020) 14:1085–1089 1087
the filter component based on the colour of the ends or the
incorrect gluing of the parts.
With the introduction of the Cobot, the operator is
required to load the components from the pick-up area and
unload the assembled filters in a dedicated area. This will
lead to a general optimization of the operator’s working
times, who will be able to focus on other tasks more dif-
ficult to automate, such as the quality control of the finished
product. In this way, the Cobot can perform all the repetitive
and alienating tasks, in which inaccuracies were generally
detected.
3 Development of a customised handling
device
The assembly task performed by the Cobot requires a grip-
ping device to grasp and handle the components of a dialy-
sis fluid filter, respectively the filter (Fig. 2a) and the cover
(Fig. 2b). Their cylindrical and flat surfaces define the geo-
metric design constraints, namely a cylindrical geometric
shape (first design constraint) as well as a parallelepiped
shape with a slight curvature in the base of the cover (second
constraint). The weight of the components and the gripper
is another constraint since it must satisfy the Cobot payload
(maximum transportable weight).
Along the conceptual phase of the design process, we
explored and developed different solutions. In particular, we
identified two working principles, suitable to this specific
application: mechanical grasping and vacuum gripping.
The first option is a mechanical grasping system but, due
to the weight increase of the tool and complications related
to its kinematics, it has been discarded.
The second option is a vacuum gripping system, since
the Cobot (ABB IRB 14050 Single-arm YuMi) has an
internal channel that delivers compressed air directly to the
end effector flange, simplifying the adoption of this type of
installation.
After an assessment phase, the vacuum gripping system
was selected as the best design solution, since it is a more
efficient system for handling both the components. On the
Fig. 2  Simplified 3D models of the components to be manipulated to
assemble the dialysis fluid filter
other hand, this system requires connections and chan-
nels for the suction cup used to grasp the components that,
thanks to AM technology, can be integrated directly into
the gripper.
Firstly, virtual tests were performed (Fig. 3) to verify
the vacuum gripping system, in particular its dimensions as
well as its correct matching with the geometries of the robot
and the components to be manipulated, avoiding collisions,
interferences in the work area, etc.
Secondly, physical prototypes (Fig. 4) were created to
verify the real capabilities of the gripper. A Fused Filament
Fabrication (FFF) technology was used to additively manu-
facture the prototypes as well as the final device, using poly-
lactic acid (PLA) polymer.
In particular, thanks to AM, two different solutions were
3D printed into physical and fully functional prototypes of
the two conceptual solutions, embodied in parts with similar
morphology but integrating two different solutions.
The first concept of the vacuum gripping system consid-
ered the cylindrical shape and the length of the filter, as well
as the small curvature of the cover. These geometric char-
acteristics were taken up in the tool to guarantee perfectly
coaxial (Filter) and planar (Cover) couplings. The suction
cup insert was created with the same approach, i.e. integrat-
ing it directly into the gripper and making it with shapes
similar to the models on the market (see Fig. 5, on the left).
This first concept did not show problems with the filter,
since the coaxiality allowed a very firm grip without any
slippage or rotation.
Fig. 3  Virtual test of first gripper prototype
Fig. 4  Set up of the AM process, using Ultimate Cura (left) and one
of the 3D printed prototype (right)
13

1088 International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) (2020) 14:1085–1089
Fig. 5  Comparison of the developed concepts: the first one (on the
left) presents a single suction cup and two rubber pads; the second
one (on the right) integrates two suction cups
Conversely, after gripping, the cover showed an uninten-
tional rotation around the sucker, caused by the little fric-
tion between surfaces in contact and the absence of relevant
locking points. To face this issue, two rubber pads have
been added. Moreover, to improve the gripping capabili-
ties, a second suction cup has been integrated to provide two
gripping points and remove the rotations of the components
with respect to their longitudinal axis, originating a second
concept (see Fig. 5, on the right).
As shown in Fig. 6, this second prototype was selected
and finally applied to the Cobot: this led to an effective grip
and lack of unintentional rotation of the components.
4 Conclusion and final remarks
This paper describes the introduction of a Cobot in a work-
station for the assembly of a biomedical filter to replace
manual operations, in the same area in which the opera-
tor previously worked, allowing the redistribution of the
“human” workforce in other, perhaps more qualifying,
tasks. Moreover, the design and development phases of a
Fig. 6  Final AM handling device applied to the Cobot
13
customised device for handling specific components and
made by FFF AM technology is presented.
The gripping system achieves the objectives set during
the design phase:
• It consists in a single gripper with double grasping capa-
bilities,
• It is lightweight (about 35 g),
• It guarantees a solid grip for both the components,
• Its final shape follows the canons of Collaborative Robot-
ics (e.g. not sharp, pointed parts, dangerous for opera-
tors).
The device has been developed relatively quickly, reducing
time and costs (10 days for conception, design, prototyping
and test). Furthermore, the set of components used such as
venturimeter, solenoid valve, Cobot, gripper and withdrawal/
deposit components works synergistically and smoothly.
The use of AM technologies allow the designer to pro-
vide a customised device for specific goals, considering the
specific constraints of each problem to face. In the proposed
case study, the final device is able to handle two components
with different surface curvatures and geometric constraints.
In addition, different configurations of the device have
been prototyped and tested thanks to AM, aiming at integrat-
ing multiple functions in the same component. This will lead
to future developments, which have already been tested as
shown in Fig. 7. In particular, the additional pink and purple
AM parts generate customised withdrawal and deposit areas
for pick-and-place operations.
Fig. 7  Additional AM withdrawal and deposit areas, with further
integration with the developed vacuum gripping system
International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) (2020) 14:1085–1089 1089
Acknowledgements  The authors would like to acknowledge Giuliana
Gavioli and Enrico Corazzari from B.Braun Avitum Italy S.p.A. for
their support.
References
1. Vysocky, A.L., Novak, P.E.: Human–robot collaboration in indus-
try. MM Sci. J. 9(2), 903–906 (2016)
2. Villani, V., Pini, F., Leali, F., Secchi, C., Fantuzzi, C.: Survey
on human–robot interaction for robot programming in industrial
applications. IFAC PapersOnLine 51(11), 66–71 (2018)
3. Magrini, E., Ferraguti, F., Ronga, A.J., Pini, F., De Luca, A., Leali,
F.: Human–robot coexistence and interaction in open industrial
cells. Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 61, 101846 (2020)
4. MacDougall, W.: Industrie 4.0: Smart Manufacturing for the
Future. Future Markets. Germany Trade & Invest, Berlin (2014)
5. Rüßmann, M., Lorenz, M., Gerbert, P., Waldner, M.: Industry 40:
The Future of Productivity and Growth in Manufacturing Indus-
tries. Boston Consulting Group, Boston (2015)
6. Dalpadulo E., Pini F., Leali F.: Assessment of design for addi-
tive manufacturing based on CAD platforms. In: International
Conference on Design Tools and Methods in Industrial Engi-
neering, ADM, pp. 970–981 (2019)
7. Gherardini, F., Mascia, M.T., Bettelli, V., Leali, F.: A co-design
method for the additive manufacturing of customised assistive
devices for hand pathologies. J. Integr. Des. Process Sci. 22(1),
21–37 (2018). https​://doi.org/10.3233/jid-2018-0002
8. Frandsen, C.S., Nielsen, M.M., Chaudhuri, A., Jayaram, J., Govin-
dan, K.: In search for classification and selection of spare parts
suitable for additive manufacturing: a literature review. Int. J.
Prod. Res. 58(4), 970–996 (2020)
9. Durão, L.F.C.S., Christ, A., Zancul, E., Anderl, R., Schützer, K.:
Additive manufacturing scenarios for distributed production of
spare parts. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 93(1–4), 869–880 (2017)
10. Bak, D.: Rapid prototyping or rapid production? 3D printing
processes move industry towards the latter. Assem Autom 23(4),
340–345 (2003). https​://doi.org/10.1108/01445​15031​05011​90
11. Pini F., Leali F., Ansaloni M.: A systematic approach to the engi-
neering design of a HRC workcell for bio-medical product assem-
bly. In: IEEE 20th Conference on Emerging Technologies and
Factory Automation (ETFA), Luxembourg, pp. 1–8 (2015)
12. Pini F., Ansaloni M., Leali F.: Evaluation of operator relief for an
effective design of HRC workcells. In: IEEE 21st International
Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation
(ETFA), Berlin, pp. 1–6 (2016)
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
13