VALIDATION OF PROTECTIVE FIELDS

Description

[0001] The invention relates to a system with at least one safe sensor for monitoring at least one protective field, a handheld testing device for validating the protective field and a visualization device for displaying the protective field, as well as a method for validating protective fields according to the preamble of claim 1 or 14.

[0002] The primary goal of safety technology is to protect people from sources of danger, such as those posed by machinery in an industrial environment. The machine is monitored using sensors, and if a situation arises in which a person is at risk of getting dangerously close to the machine, appropriate safeguarding measures are taken. Sensors used in safety technology must be particularly reliable and therefore meet stringent safety requirements, such as the EN ISO 13849 standard for machinery safety and the EN / IEC 61496 device standard for electro-sensitive protective equipment (ESPE). To meet these safety standards, a number of measures must be taken, such as secure electronic evaluation using redundant, diverse electronics, function monitoring, or monitoring for contamination of optical components.

[0003] To ensure the safety of people in the vicinity of the machine, a sensor often monitors a protective field that must not be entered while the machine is operating. If the sensor detects an object violating the protective field, the machine is switched to a safe state. A protective field is assigned a specific minimum resolution down to which objects can be reliably detected. This resolution is usually linked to anthropometric data, for example, a resolution of 14 mm for detecting fingers. This specification is referred to as the protection class; in the example above, the protective field is designed for finger protection.

[0004] Protective fields are usually configured manually, or (semi-)automated configuration proposals are reviewed by a safety expert. Safety standards require a test before the system is commissioned to determine whether the protective fields react to objects as intended and whether a required response time for activation is met. For this validation of the protective fields, a standard-compliant test object is used, often a cylindrical test rod whose dimensions correspond to the resolution. A test object for the finger guard example above would therefore have a diameter of 14 mm.

[0005] The sensor uses a principle invisible to humans for contactless monitoring, which evaluates signals such as infrared light or radar waves. Accordingly, it's difficult to determine where the boundaries of a protective field lie in space. This makes validation very difficult.

[0006] EP 3 974 936 A1 deals with the configuration of a visualization device for a machine area in which at least one sensor is located. For this purpose, reference markers of the machine area and object markers of the sensors are recorded in pairs and geometrically related to each other. In an operating phase following the configuration, a reference marker is recorded nearby, which the visualization device uses to orient itself in order to accurately display sensor information in the environment, which may also include a protective field. However, EP 3 974 936 A1 does not deal with the validation of protective fields.

[0007] EP 4 000 815 A1 describes a visualization device for at least one protective field of a safe sensor that is attached to a moving machine part of a machine in a manner that accompanies the movement. Transformations are presented to adapt the representation of the protective field to the pose of the sensor relative to the visualization device, in other words, to display the protective field in the correct position and orientation despite the sensor's movement. In EP 3 974 936 A1, validation of protective fields also plays no role.

[0008] DE 10 2017 103 568 C5 discloses a safe sensor that uses ultrasound to provide a user with contactless haptic feedback about a property of the sensor or a result of its detection of objects. In one embodiment, the property of the sensor is a protective field. The feedback allows the user to feel the boundary of the protective field with their bare hand. This is a haptic substitute for visualizing protective fields. They are not validated in this way. It would also be counterintuitive to use a test rod in connection with DE 10 2017 103 568 C5, because the rather subtle haptic feedback only works on one part of the body.

[0009] EP 2 048 557 B1 discloses a handheld device for configuring protective fields of an optoelectronic sensor. The handheld device is moved directly in the room to positions that are to be configured for the protective field, for example at its corners, and is detected by the sensor in that respective position. To ensure that the position to be configured is detected by the sensor with sufficient resolution, a sphere of appropriate dimensions is attached to the handheld device. In one embodiment, the handheld device can have a display, in particular a connection for data glasses, so that the user can form a particularly intuitive and realistic picture when configuring and checking the protective fields. Checking here means that the configured protective field is inspected again. Validation in the sense of targeted protective field triggering is not addressed.The sphere could, in principle, be used as a replacement for a test rod, but this is not proposed and would be extremely impractical because the handset's display would then be difficult or impossible to see while the handset is being brought into the protective field. The mechanical coupling of the handset and test rod is also extremely disadvantageous for cost reasons, as it would require a special design.

[0010] EP 2 790 040 B1 discloses a system for configuring a laser scanner's monitoring area. A sequence generation unit is placed at a position to be configured in space, which then generates an optical sequence actively using its own light source or passively by reflecting the scanning beam. The optical sequence is recognized by the laser scanner and interpreted as a configuration instruction. The sequence generation unit is significantly more expensive than a simple test rod. Furthermore, it is used for configuring, but not for validating, protective fields.

[0011] DE 100 00 287 A1 deals with the monitoring of a detection area on a piece of work equipment. Safety-critical objects within a protection zone are detected based on a reference image comparison and / or color feature analysis. A warning zone can be located upstream of the protection zone, with one embodiment indicating, similar to a traffic light, whether there are currently any intrusions into the protection zone or the warning zone. Furthermore, a dynamic self-test for functional verification is proposed elsewhere, in which a defined test object must be detected in the protection zone at specified times.

[0012] It is therefore an object of the invention to further simplify the commissioning of a safe sensor for monitoring a protective field.

[0013] This object is achieved by a system comprising at least one safe sensor for monitoring at least one protective field, a handheld testing device for validating the protective field, and a visualization device for displaying the protective field, as well as a method for validating protective fields according to claim 1 and 14, respectively. A protective field is a sub-area of ​​the detection range of the safe sensor configured or defined by a 2D or 3D geometry. As described above, the safe sensor detects object intrusions into the protective field and is designed to output a safety-related output signal for a monitored machine in this case. For this purpose, the safe sensor preferably has a safe output, which is, for example, designed with two channels (OSSD, Output Signal Switching Device).During operation, the safe output signal ensures that the risk of accidents is eliminated by the machine swerving, slowing down, or stopping. Multiple sensors can be provided to cover a larger monitoring area or to create redundancy and prevent shadowing through overlapping monitoring. Each sensor can monitor one or more protective fields. The safe sensor preferably uses a non-contact operating principle, particularly as an optoelectronic sensor such as a camera, a 3D camera, or a laser scanner, but also non-optical sensors such as ultrasound or radar.As used throughout the description, safe and safety mean that measures have been taken to control errors up to a specified safety level or to comply with the provisions of a relevant safety standard for machinery safety or electro-sensitive protective devices, some of which are mentioned in the introduction.

[0014] The test device is mobile or portable, can preferably be operated with one hand and is then referred to as handheld. It has defined dimensions corresponding to the protection class to be achieved. Penetration of the test device into a protective field is detected as a protective field violation, as with any object of corresponding dimensions, or can be used to test whether the protective field is correctly configured and whether the safe sensor actually responds, including determining a reaction time. The protection class to be achieved is preferably attached to body parts, for example finger protection, hand protection, arm protection, leg protection or body protection, with dimensions such as 14 mm, 20 mm, 40 mm, 55 mm, 70 mm, 120 mm, 150 mm or 200 mm. This allows for standard-compliant validation of the protective fields.

[0015] The visualization device has a display and a control and evaluation unit designed to display the protective field on the display. For this purpose, for example, a graphic representation of the protective field is generated and displayed using geometric objects such as polygons, circles, or spatial equivalents that illustrate the protective field as surfaces or bodies. The visualization device is connected to the safe sensor at least indirectly and preferably wirelessly via any known communication protocol, i.e., directly or via another device such as a higher-level controller or a cloud. The configuration of the protective field is known in the visualization device, preferably via this connection, but also in any other way, or the visualization device is already used for configuration and therefore knows the protective fields.The visualization device is preferably a mobile device such as a tablet, a smartphone or VR glasses.

[0016] The invention is based on the fundamental idea of ​​supporting the validation of protective fields with the visualization device. The at least indirect connection between the visualization device and the safe sensor transmits respective protective field violations, and the control and evaluation unit ensures that feedback is provided to the user in the event of a protective field violation. Depending on the design, the visualization device is not necessarily used for the feedback, and feedback from the visualization device is not necessarily provided via the display.

[0017] The invention has the advantage of significantly simplifying and accelerating the commissioning of a safety application. Validation can be carried out entirely directly in the area to be protected, with direct reference to the room, the machine, and the protective fields. This, and the direct feedback, make validation much more intuitive and can be performed with less expert knowledge and experience. A user-friendly program or app can guide you through the process, providing visualization and feedback on protective field violations. This app can also explain the validation or prompt for further required validation steps, for example, for a protective field that has not yet been tested or has been tested insufficiently. The app can also request, guide, and log regular checks after operating phases.

[0018] The visualization device is preferably registered in a common world coordinate system with the safe sensor. This ensures that the protective field is visualized in the correct spatial relationship. Reference is made to the documents EP 3 974 936 A1 and EP 4 000 815 A1 cited above as examples of how this correct spatial relationship between the visualization device and the sensor can be achieved.

[0019] The visualization device preferably has a camera and displays the protective field superimposed with a real image. Even a pure visualization of the protective field already provides considerable support for validation, but overlaying it with a real image facilitates intuitive validation of the protective fields even further.

[0020] The visualization device is preferably designed to vibrate as feedback to the user. Haptic feedback makes the protective field at least indirectly perceptible. Haptic feedback introduces a further sensory dimension in addition to the visualization of the protective fields. Binary information, i.e., vibration or no vibration, corresponds to the equally binary violation of the protective field.

[0021] The control and evaluation unit is preferably designed to highlight the protective field on the display as feedback to the user. In this embodiment, visual feedback is provided. For example, the violated protective field, including its border areas or its entire surface, lights up in a different color, preferably a signal color such as yellow, orange, or red, or it flashes. Acoustic feedback is conceivable as a further alternative to visual feedback. Haptic, visual, and / or acoustic feedback can be used individually or combined with one another; this can also be customized by the user.

[0022] Preferably, the location of the protective field intrusion is displayed. This is special visual feedback that can be combined with highlighting the protective field on the display. For validation, the only thing that is initially relevant is whether the protective field is violated or not. Many safe sensors only provide this binary information externally. Nevertheless, a finer spatial resolution is required, at least internally within the sensor, to detect the protective field intrusion, and thus the location of the protective field intrusion is known. This information can, in principle, also be communicated to the visualization device. The additional information on the location of the protective field intrusion provides the user with further information, for example, whether further validation steps are required because a certain part of a protective field has not yet been tested, and also whether the displayed protective field actually corresponds to the monitored protective field.

[0023] The system preferably has a memory, and the control and evaluation unit is configured to document images of protective field interventions by storing them in the memory. The memory can be provided internally in the visualization device, but also in the safe sensor, externally in a connected computing unit, or, for example, in a cloud. By storing images of the protective field interventions, the validation can be documented very easily and completely. Individual images, as well as image sequences or videos, can be stored. The stored images can serve as an important part of a validation protocol.

[0024] The images are preferably supplemented with documentation information, in particular a timestamp, an identification of the secure sensor, a name of the person performing the validation, and / or a digital signature. Such documentation information can further support standard-compliant validation and logging. The timestamp can be used to verify that the validation was performed at an appropriate time and not, for example, many years ago. Identification ensures that the validation actually relates to the secure sensor used in the application. The user name ensures a responsible person and enables, for example, verification of whether this user was qualified and authorized to perform a validation.The stored images and documentation information can be authenticated with digital signatures and certificates and protected against tampering.

[0025] The test device is preferably designed passively without electrical components, particularly as a test rod. It is therefore a simple object without its own active capabilities, which is extremely cost-effective. The test device only has the dimensions required by the standard and preferably a specific color, because a protective field must respond to specific remission properties, such as a light and a black object. It is preferably a test rod, i.e., has a cylindrical geometry with a diameter corresponding to the protection class.

[0026] The testing device preferably has a feedback device designed to provide feedback to the user by means of vibration, a visual signal, and / or an acoustic signal. In this embodiment, the testing device is more complex and not merely passive. It comprises its own control electronics and communication interface in conjunction with the control and evaluation unit of the visualization device. Thus, it is now the testing device that provides feedback about protective field violations. This provides an even more direct, particularly intuitive connection to the test-based violation of protective fields during validation. The type of feedback refers to the analogous possibilities for feedback via the visualization device. Feedback can be provided in combination at the testing device and the visualization device.From a purely geometric point of view, an active test device can also have a cylindrical shape, but the term test rod should be reserved for a simple passive test rod.

[0027] The visualization device preferably has a camera, and the control and evaluation unit is designed to record the test device and identify it as such using image processing. This establishes a connection to a specific test device. With an active test device, the communication connection can be used instead of recording and image processing.

[0028] The testing device preferably has an optical code, and the control and evaluation unit is designed to read the code, in particular to identify the testing device and / or to install a program for carrying out the validation of a protective field. The optical code means a barcode or a corresponding two-dimensional code. Alternatively, text recognition, for example of an article number or other identification, is conceivable. The testing device is recognized as such via the optical code, and further properties such as its dimensions can be derived. In particular, the code can contain a reference to a source for obtaining, in particular downloading, an app or other program for the inventive visualization and validation of protective fields, or to further assistance with validation.

[0029] The control and evaluation unit is preferably designed to detect the dimensions of the test device. This can be done through image processing or by identifying the test device, for example, via an optical code or an article number. The visualization device thus has, in particular, information about which protection class the test device is suitable for validating.

[0030] The control and evaluation unit is preferably designed to display the resolution of the protective field. The resolution can be displayed in metric units or in classes such as finger protection or body protection. This allows the user to identify which test fixture of which dimensions should be used for validation, either for each protective field or for all protective fields together.

[0031] The control and evaluation unit is preferably designed to issue a warning to the user if the dimensions of the test fixture are unsuitable for resolving the protective field. In this case, the test fixture and the protective field are not compatible. A test fixture that is too coarse, for example, for arm protection, is unsuitable for verifying finger protection; conversely, a protective field for body protection may overlook a test fixture for hand protection. The visualization device can warn the user and provide a reference to a suitable test fixture.

[0032] The method according to the invention is a computer-implemented method that runs, particularly in the form of an app, with regard to the protective field evaluations in the safe sensor and with regard to the display of protective fields and coordination of feedback on protective field violations in the visualization device. The configuration of the protective fields precedes the contactless safeguarding; due to the complex safety aspects to be considered, this is typically carried out manually by a safety expert. However, automatic support is possible, such as suggestions for protective fields and a configuration program with graphical support, for example, similar to a CAD program, with which geometric objects as parts of protective fields are integrated into images of the machine's surroundings. The visualization device can also support the configuration of protective fields.

[0033] The test fixture is preferably guided by the machine. This is particularly suitable for a robot as the machine to be monitored, which, for example, guides the test fixture at the tip of its arm like a tool. In this way, protective fields in the immediate vicinity of the machine can be scanned, as long as they are within reach of the machine or robot. The user stands at a safe distance or even conducts the validation remotely and receives feedback on protective field violations via the visualization device. The machine can run an automatic program, for example at least parts of its usual workflow. It is also possible for the user to guide the test fixture themselves as if using an extended hand, whereby movements of the visualization device can even be transferred to the test fixture for particularly intuitive control.

[0034] The method according to the invention can be developed in a similar way to the system according to the invention and thereby exhibits similar advantages. Such advantageous features are described by way of example, but not exhaustively, in the subclaims following the independent claims.

[0035] The invention will be explained in more detail below with regard to further features and advantages, using exemplary embodiments and with reference to the accompanying drawings. The figures of the drawing show: Fig. 1 shows a schematic overview of a system with a safe sensor for monitoring a protective field, a handheld test device for validating the protective field, and a visualization device for displaying the protective field; Fig. 2 shows a schematic representation of an active test device as an alternative to a passive test rod; and Fig. 3 shows a further illustration of the system according toFigure 1 and the resulting validation of the protective field.

[0036] Figure 1shows a schematic overview of a system with a safe sensor 10 for monitoring a protective field 12 that protects a machine 14, with a handheld test device 16 for validating the protective field 12, and with a visualization device 18 for displaying the protective field 12. Before commissioning the machine 14 while protected by the protective field 12, validation of the safety application is required. The test device 16 is repeatedly inserted into the protective field 12 at various points to test whether the safe sensor 10 detects the protective field intrusion and generates a safe protection signal, and with what response time. The protective field 12 is configured with a specific resolution that typically corresponds to body parts to be detected. The test device 16 has suitable dimensions for this purpose.For example, a protective field 12 with the protection class "finger protection" is validated with a finger-thick test fixture 16; a diameter of 14 mm is considered to be standard-compliant. Only one safe sensor 10 and only one protective field 12 are shown; one safe sensor 10 can also monitor multiple protective fields, and multiple safe sensors can be used.

[0037] The safe sensor 10 is in Figure 1Depicted purely as an example as a camera. This is a preferred embodiment, whereby the camera can be a normal camera or a 3D camera. There are various underlying detection principles for 3D cameras, such as a time-of-flight camera, a stereo camera, or a camera with a projection or light-section method. Other optoelectronic alternatives include, but are not limited to, laser scanners, light grids, or LIDAR sensors, in particular with a protective bell for the tip of a robot's arm, as described, for example, in DE 10 2015 112 656 A1. Non-optical detection principles such as radar and ultrasound are also possible. Such safe sensors, which monitor a protective field, are known per se and are therefore not described in detail.The camera, as an example of a safe sensor 10, is therefore shown only schematically, with a camera controller 20 for protective field evaluation and a safe output 22 (OSSD, Output Signal Switching Device) for outputting a safety-related output signal in response to a protective field violation. During operation of the machine 14, the safety-related output signal ensures, via a connection of the safe output 22 to the machine 14, that a hazard is eliminated, depending on the situation and safety application, through measures such as avoiding, slowing down, performing other work steps, or stopping the machine 14.

[0038] The test device 16 in Figure 1is designed as a simple test rod with a suitable diameter, i.e. it is a piece of material such as wood or plastic without any electronic components, simply with the required dimensions and preferably a colored coating for standardized reflectance behavior. This is particularly cost-effective. Later, with reference to the Figure 2 an alternative of an active testing device 16 is presented.

[0039] The visualization device 18 is depicted as a smartphone, which is also a particularly preferred embodiment. Other possible embodiments include a tablet, a smartwatch, AR (augmented reality) glasses, or a similar mobile device. A larger computer such as a notebook is less convenient but at least still conceivable. The visualization device 18 has a display 24, a control and evaluation unit 26, an optional camera 28, an interface 30, an optional vibration alarm 32, and an optional loudspeaker 34. Some elements are shown in dashed lines because they are located inside the device or on the back.

[0040] Depending on the design of the visualization device 18 and the display 24, a representation of 2D image data or 3D image data is possible. The control and evaluation unit 26 comprises at least one digital computing component, such as a microprocessor or a CPU (Central Processing Unit), an FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array), a DSP (Digital Signal Processor), an ASIC (Application-Specific Integrated Circuit), a KI processor, an NPU (Neural Processing Unit), a GPU (Graphics Processing Unit), or the like. Such digital computing components can also be used for the camera control 22. The interface 30 is preferably configured for at least one communication protocol, preferably wireless, such as I / O-Link, Bluetooth, WLAN, Wi-Fi, 3G / 4G / 5G.It is connected to the safe output 22 of the safe sensor 10. Unlike the connection of the safe output 22 to the machine 14, this connection does not involve the safe transmission of the safe protection signal, but merely ensures that the visualization device 18 receives information about protective field violations. Thus, the connection can be indirect in every respect and does not even necessarily have to include the safe output 22. The two direct connections shown can each be indirect, for example, with a higher-level controller as an intermediate instance. The interface 30 can also connect the visualization device 18 to an external computing unit, such as a computer of any type, including notebooks, smartphones, tablets, a (safety) controller, a local network, an edge device, or a cloud.In addition, the control and evaluation unit 26 can be supported in visualization and validation or, for example, can output image data to the outside and, if necessary, archive it there.

[0041] The visualization device 18 visualizes the protective field 12 on the display 24, preferably in real time and preferably in superimposition with an image from the camera 28.

[0042] In the real world, the protective field 12 is invisible, since the safe sensor 10 typically operates with light outside the visible spectrum, or a safe sensor 10 with a different invisible operating principle is used. Even with light in the visible spectrum, points of incidence of the light might be detectable, but not the protective field 12 as such, since the light does not persist and, during propagation through air, would only be visible due to dust, and then not exclusively in the protective field 12.

[0043] In order to display the protective field 12 in the correct pose, i.e., the correct position and orientation, the control and evaluation unit 26 must determine the pose of the safe sensor 10 relative to the visualization device 18, or in other words, a coordinate transformation between the coordinates of the visualization device 18 and the coordinates of the safe sensor 10, preferably in real time. The steps and calculations required for this are not the subject of this description; for such a visualization, reference is made, for example, to the documents EP 3 974 936 A1 and EP 4 000 815 A1 cited in the introduction.

[0044] Figure 2shows a schematic representation of an active test device 16 as an alternative to a passive test rod. The active test device 16 has a validation display 36, here exemplary in the form of LEDs, a test controller 38, and an interface 40 for connection to the visualization device 18. Instead of LEDs or in addition to them, a vibration alarm and / or a loudspeaker of the active test device 16 can be provided. The active test device 16 thus provides feedback options that are used instead of those of the visualization device 18 or in addition to it during the validation of the protective field 12. The interface 40 can be wireless, but it is also conceivable to establish a cable connection, for example via USB. In this case, it is also conceivable that the test controller 38 is omitted and its tasks are taken over by the control and evaluation unit 26.Particularly preferably, the visualization device 18 can be attached to a holder of the testing device 16, so that the user effectively only needs to carry one device. In particular, a vibration alarm from the visualization device 18 is then transmitted to the passive testing device 16. Such a holder is also conceivable for a passive testing device 16.

[0045] Figure 3 shows a further illustration of the system according to Figure 1 , in which, for simplicity, only the safe sensor 10, the protective field 12 monitored by it, the test device 16 held in one hand by a user, and the visualization device 18 held in the other hand are shown without their respective internal structures. Based on these illustrations, the validation of the protective field 12 will now be explained. An app running in the control and evaluation unit 26 on the visualization device 18 can guide the validation.

[0046] The user then repeatedly and deliberately violates the protective field 12 in order to validate the reliable detection of protective field violations across the entire protective field 12. Thanks to the visualization of the protective field 12 on the visualization device 18, it is very intuitively possible to test the geometric boundaries of the protective field 12. The user receives feedback from the visualization device 18 and / or an active testing device 16 as to whether the safe sensor 10 detects a protective field violation, preferably in real time. One or more feedback channels are possible, which are implemented via the display 24, the vibration alarm 32, the loudspeaker 34, or corresponding devices of the active testing device 16 and by means of which the user can verify whether the protective fields are correctly parameterized or, where appropriate, incorrectly parameterized.

[0047] The vibration alarm 32 acts as a type of haptic test rod, making the protective field 12 practically tangible, even if the vibration alarm is triggered, at least in the case of a passive test rod, by the visualization device 18 and not the test device 16. The possibility of coupling the two devices together via a bracket was mentioned above. Simple audio signals, as well as more complex jingles or voice messages, are possible on an acoustic feedback channel of the loudspeaker 34. The display 24 or the validation display 36 can provide simple visual signals such as a red flashing light. The display 24 is capable of significantly more complex visual feedback, such as a flashing and / or color change of the visualized protective field, a frame around the protective field, or a visualization of the exact location of the intervention in the protective field. Text messages are also conceivable.All of these feedbacks can be given individually or in any combination.

[0048] In a preferred embodiment, the resolution or protection class of the protective field 12 is displayed, either as a color code or as text such as "finger protection" or "14 mm." This lets the user know which test device 16 is to be used for validation. Furthermore, it is conceivable that the visualization device 18 automatically recognizes the test device 16 and, in particular, its dimensions and thus its suitability for which protection class. This can be achieved via image processing and measurement or by detecting a coding of the test device 16. In the narrower sense, a coding is understood to mean an optical code such as a barcode or a two-dimensional code; however, in a broader sense, an article number or any other identification can also be recognized. Knowing the dimensions of the test device 16, the visualization device 18 can also check whether the protective field 12 and the test device 16 match each other.Then, if necessary, a warning can be issued by the visualization device 18, for example if a protective field 12 for arm protection is to be validated using a test device 16 for finger protection, and in particular a suitable test device 16 or possibly also an adaptation of the protective field 12 can be proposed, the latter of course having to be compatible with the safety application.

[0049] The aforementioned coding of the test device 16 and its acquisition create a certain coupling between the visualization device 18 and the test device 16. This makes it possible to assign additional information about the test device 16 or, for example, to obtain it via a cloud. This allows the use of an original product to be verified to ensure standard-compliant validation. Furthermore, it is conceivable that the code contains a link or the like via which the visualization device 18 gains access to a program or app with which the validation is performed. In the case of an active test device, this coupling is preferably established via the interface 40.

[0050] The visualization device 18 can document the validation so that the validation required by safety standards can be later verified and verified before commissioning. For this purpose, images and / or videos of protective field interventions using the test device 16 are stored, either internally in the visualization device 18 or externally, for example, in a cloud. The image material can be provided with additional information such as time stamps, location data, in particular GPS data, the name of the user performing the validation, serial or article numbers of the safe sensor 10, the visualization device 18, and / or the test device 16. A digital signature or certificate can be used to authenticate the archived data and protect it from subsequent manipulation.

[0051] This makes it easy to fulfill the protocol requirements required for acceptance and commissioning.

Claims

1. A system having at least one safe sensor (10) for monitoring at least one protected field (12), having a mobile, in particular hand-held, test device (16) for validating the protected field (12), and having a visualization device (18) for displaying the protected field (12), wherein the test device (16) has predefined dimensions corresponding to a type of protection to be achieved and the safe sensor (10) is configured to recognize a penetration of the test device (16) into the protected field (12) as a protected field infringement and to thereupon output a safeguarding signal, and wherein the visualization device (18) is at least indirectly connected to the safe sensor (10) and has a display (24) and a control and evaluation unit (26) that is configured to present the protected field (12) on the display (24), wherein the visualization device (18) is connected to the safe sensor (10) such that a protected field infringement is transmitted, and characterized in that the control and evaluation unit (26) is configured to provide haptic, acoustic, and / or visual feedback to a user on a protected field intrusion, with the visual feedback comprising a highlighting of the protected field (12) on the display (24), in particular by illuminating the infringed protected field in its boundary zones or over the full area in a different color, by flashing, by a frame around the protected field, and / or by a change of color.

2. A system in accordance with claim 1, wherein the visualization device (18) is registered to the safe sensor (10) in a common global coordinate system, with in particular the visualization device (18) having a camera (28) and displaying the protected field (12) superposed by a real image.

3. A system in accordance with claim 1 or claim 2, wherein the visualization device (18) is configured to vibrate as feedback to the user.

4. A system in accordance with any one of the preceding claims, wherein the control and evaluation unit (26) is configured to display a location of the protected field intrusion as feedback to the user.

5. A system in accordance with any one of the preceding claims that has a memory and wherein the control and evaluation unit (26) is configured to document images of protected field intrusions by storing in the memory.

6. A system in accordance with claim 5, wherein the images are supplemented by documentation information, in particular by a time stamp, an identification of the safe sensor (10), a name of the person carrying out the validation, and / or a digital signature.

7. A system in accordance with any one of the preceding claims, wherein the test device (16) is configured as passive without any electrical components, in particular as a test bar.

8. A system in accordance with any one of the claims 1 to 6, wherein the test device (16) has a feedback device (36) that is configured to provide the feedback to the user by means of vibration, an optical signal, and / or an acoustic signal.

9. A system in accordance with any one of the preceding claims, wherein the visualization device (18) has a camera (28) and the control and evaluation unit (26) is configured to record the test device (16) and to identify it as such by means of image processing.

10. A system in accordance with any one of the preceding claims, wherein the test device (16) has an optical code and the control and evaluation unit (26) is configured to read the code, in particular to identify the test device (16) and / or to install a program to carry out the validation of a protected field (12).

11. A system in accordance with any one of the preceding claims, wherein the control and evaluation unit (26) is configured to recognize the dimensions of the test device (16).

12. A system in accordance with any one of the preceding claims, wherein the control and evaluation unit (26) is configured to display a resolution of the protected field (12).

13. A system in accordance with claim 11 or claim 12, wherein the control and evaluation unit (26) is configured to output a warning to the user when the dimensions of the test device (16) are unsuitable for a resolution of the protected field (12).

14. A method of validating protected fields (12) for safeguarding a machine (14) having a mobile, in particular hand-held, test device (16) of predefined dimensions corresponding to a type of protection to be achieved in which method at least one safe sensor (10) monitors at least one protected field (12), thus recognizes a penetration of the test device (16) into the protected field (12) as a protected field infringement, and thereupon outputs a safeguarding signal, and wherein a visualization device (18) is connected at least indirectly to the safe sensor (10) and presents the protected field (12) on a display (24) of the visualization device (18), wherein the visualization device (18) is connected to the safe sensor (10) such that a protected field infringement is transmitted, and characterized in that a haptic, acoustic, and / or visual feedback is provided to a user on a protected field intrusion, with the visual feedback comprising a highlighting of the protected field (12) on the display (24), in particular by illuminating the infringed protected field in its boundary zones or over the full area in a different color, by flashing, by a frame around the protected field, and / or by a change of color.

15. A method in accordance with claim 14, wherein the test device (16) is guided by the machine (14), in particular by a machine (14) formed as a robot.