
Ford Pilots New Exoskeleton to Help Lessen Chance of Worker Fatigue, Injury - rgbrenner
https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2017/11/09/ford-exoskeleton-technology-pilot.html
======
chairmanwow
> Between 2005 and 2016, the most recent full year of data, the company saw an
> 83 percent decrease in the number of incidents that resulted in days away,
> work restrictions or job transfers – to an all-time low of 1.55 incidents
> per 100 full-time North American employees.

I find it incredibly impressive for a manufacturer to achieve something like
this.

~~~
saturdaysaint
I'm not sure how much to congratulate them, since 2005 is almost exactly when
the cost of programmable robotic arms became far cheaper than the cost of
worker injuries.

I've been working for automotive suppliers since 2006 and I've never seen a
factory worker doing anything remotely strenuous or dangerous. Programmed
robotic arms do almost literally anything involving lifting, and almost
anything involving a dangerous tool or machine. Additionally, every workcenter
is outfitted with lots of sensor-laden safety systems that all but ensure the
operator is far away from anything that could hurt them. 99% of the accidents
I see on reports involve ladders, box cutters, hi lo carts, etc.

~~~
rconti
It was an incredible contrast to tour the BMW factory in Munich in August,
then the Tesla factory in Fremont in October. The BMW factory was _highly_
automated, and the assembly line did so much for the humans -- positioning the
cars in just the right ergonomic locations for humans to work on them.
Meanwhile, over at Tesla, forklift drivers are crashing into things, dragging
chunks of wood under their wheels, so much more manual labor, etc. I don't
expect Tesla to be up the level of BMW; the volume isn't there to justify it.
It's just really interesting.

I'm trying to think of when I would have seen BMW factory employees working
overhead, and I just can't think of it. I wonder why Ford would even have
tasks that require this rather than just rotate the assemblies being worked
on.

------
mncharity
So like a torque reaction arm[1], mounted on your back, that uses your own
arm? In addition to the OP sidebar video, there are these[2]. They also make
an "anchor it to something nearby" portable arm.

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=torque+reaction...](https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=torque+reaction+arm)
[2]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpYhY5-cVyk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpYhY5-cVyk)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=sn7qETycSUs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=sn7qETycSUs)

~~~
notimetorelax
On the page there are photos with worker doing other things like putting
things in place, where torque reaction arm is fairly useless.

------
Dowwie
They need these for nurses. Patients are heavier than ever and nurses keep
getting more patients assigned.

~~~
lliamander
I think in general the role of orderlies has been to help with these kinds of
tasks.

There also cranes to help get heavy patients around, but even getting them
strapped in can take quite a bit of work.

EDIT: but I agree, getting these for nurses would be a good idea.

------
kelvin0
Quick question: how about exercise and prevention? Not saying the exoskeleton
could be replaced by exercise, but simple scapular and general mobility
exercises will do wonders to prevent this type of injury/fatigue/pain.

Example video:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgxr6xAB5ZM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgxr6xAB5ZM)

~~~
analogmemory
Because solving problems is seen as better. Fixing the root cause is less sexy
and hard to motivate people. In this example getting people to do physical
therapy or even daily exercise is not something that’ll get you a press
release. I could be a bit biased tho. I’m a big proponent of doing Pilates or
any whole body exercise regime

------
wst_
At this point I can't help but let my imagination loose. I assume it would be
rather academic discussion, but anyway... Would that be possible, at current
state of technology, to replace entire factory plant with robots? If so why no
one is doing it? If not, what are we missing? What could be the implication of
such work force shift?

~~~
jefft255
It's more often a question of whether it's worth using a robot instead of
humans. I'm pretty sure it's already possible to automate much more than
what's already automated in a car production line. Sometimes, for a given
task, it's way simpler to use a human worker than to design a state of the art
robot for this one task.

~~~
rconti
What I found is that, in high volume auto plans, humans are used for tasks
like pulling wiring harnesses into the vehicle (through grommets, etc),
plugging in connectors, things like that. The major body work and
positioning/lifting/welding/painting is done by robots, and often there are
human-guided robots for difficult tasks such as lifting 100+lb seats into
place in the chassis. The robot handles the weight, the human just guides the
seat into place.

------
johntb86
It looks like they should get workers belay glasses as well.

~~~
jonlucc
I was looking at the pictures thinking it would be a lot easier to turn the
car on its side, so the bottom of the car is at a good working height directly
in front of the worker and without the neck strain.

~~~
HeyLaughingBoy
What do you do about the torque exerted through all the fasteners connecting
the large masses mounted to the car that are designed to have the force
directed vertically through the bottom of the car?

Turning the car on its side sounds like a good idea until you realized that,
e.g., the seats can now twist the bottom of the body pan.

------
evv
If I were working in a factory, I would probably consider it _less_ safe to
strap myself to a powerful piece of machinery that may (or may not) be under
my control. That said, I'm sure they are taking safety very seriously.

~~~
BrooklynRage
The vest isn't powered. Rather, its goal is to absorb some of the force
exerted on the wearer and transmit it to the ground (instead of the person's
body).

A few months ago, I built a rudimentary unpowered exoskeleton similar to the
Ekso models, and it did help with carrying heavy loads once I got past the
initial awkwardness of wearing it.

~~~
redler
_A few months ago, I built a rudimentary unpowered exoskeleton_

HN is truly sui generis.

------
Avshalom
So will the workers be getting raises for the increase in productivity?

~~~
oh_sigh
I don't know...how much of the increase of productivity is a result of the
workers themselves intrinsically increasing their productivity, versus some
outside party increasing it through research and capital investment?

Let's say I own a lawn care business, and you gladly accept work raking lawns
for $10/hr@8 hr days, and you can rake 2 acres per day(or, $40 per acre). If I
decide to plunk down a bunch of money and buy a turbine leaf blower, and you
can now do the same job on 6 acres per day, except using the leaf blower for 6
acres is much less physically exhausting than raking 2 acres of leaves, how
much money should I as the business owner owe to you for my own investment
into increasing your productivity?

~~~
forapurpose
Capital is usually what makes human labor more productive; we aren't getting
smarter, faster, or stronger.

For example, if you work in IT you benefit from massive capital investments
that researched, developed, and deployed every bit of technology you use, from
18th century research on electricity (and probably earlier research) to every
component in your PC to C to the Internet to AI, to the technology used in the
global supply chain that makes it all (to much, much more) ... Should you be
paid as if you were utilizing no capital, and you were working in a cave by
firelight with carbonized wood on the wall?

Almost all of anyone's productivity, I expect, is due to capital investment
that they didn't make.

~~~
EliRivers
Yet the benefits primarily go to the rich, who also didn't make that capital
investment

------
amptorn
I hope this will be available to, like, regular humans who need it for medical
reasons, not just Ford workers.

------
Gustomaximus
Side point: and understand if I get trashed here as maybe I am doing what I am
about to criticise.... is it just me or are HN comments increasingly glib,
political and of little informational value? This post is interesitng
information with great potential for interesting discussion but the comments
so far seem dominated by a style I would not normally expect on HN, something
that has been happening over time but seems sharply more common these days.

When I came to HN, I did so because it was not Reddit. It was dominated by 2
things; information that I didn't understand (too technical) or 2) something
that improved my knowledge about the world and business, the discussions often
more so than the post.

From this I wonder (assuming people agree...) what can we do to hold the
values of old HN discussion/posts, or is this the anthem of
progress/popularity I have to accept?

~~~
s_kilk
This supposed separation between the technical and the social/political is
illusory, and shows a very blinkered and sheltered view of the world.

In actuality the technical and the social are deeply enmeshed, the society we
live in shapes the tools we have, and the tools we have shape the society we
live in. In this case we see a technology being developed and deployed to
serve the interests of one group of people with little regard for how it
affects the livelihoods of the other group. This is an ideological act, and
(contrary to the whinging of so many technological determinists) an
ideological deployment of technology.

If you've detected a change in the tone around here it's possible that more
and more techies are waking up to the fact that politics is more than just
dinner-party conversation and affiliation signalling.

For more on the topic I'd recommend picking up some Andrew Feenberg, his book
"Transforming Technology" in particular.

~~~
dawnbreez
I believe that politics is a cancer. It demands attention, refuses to
relinquish control of conversations it becomes a part of, and only very rarely
does it contribute anything beyond a lot of yelling back and forth. Once you
have brought up Politics, you can rest assured that friends will become
enemies, and the conversation will never turn back to the topic at hand.

I understand the urge to bring politics in; the world around us seems to be
falling apart because of political schemes. I simply do not _care_. If you
really want to throw fits about capitalism and communism, or throw up a pithy
quip about Trump et al., do so in a separate thread, possibly an Ask HN
("Who's your favorite liar?"). I'm going to go enjoy the fact that someone's
working on mass-producing a powered exoskeleton.

~~~
dragontamer
Unfortunately, if you don't discuss politics, then politics comes to you.

The social power structure of the USA implies that politics is in the hands of
the people. At very least, that's the aspiration of the US Political system
(even if its got some issues in practice). So convincing other people on a
day-to-day basis is one of the more effective ways of causing political
change.

If politics is ignored, then you begin to lose in politics. Not only do people
affect laws, but laws also affect people. Ignoring this fact will cause the
laws to potentially shift away from your favor.

~~~
dawnbreez
One of the other reasons I hate politics is the mentality that the only
_losing_ move is not to play...which is often followed by "vote for me". It's
a cheap, underhanded tactic that tales advantage of First Past The Post's
greatest weakness as a voting system, and it is the reason why we have to put
up with the "lesser" of two evils instead of a decent human being at the
reins.

To quote the old song: "I won't be fooled again".

~~~
dragontamer
The reason why we put up with the "lesser of two evils" is because the 3rd and
4th evils are the Libertarian Party and Green party respectively.

Which I don't believe represent the people's interest in the slightest. Anti-
vax and "What is Aleppo" stain those two.

Its more legitimate to attempt to usurp the parties from within (ie: Trump /
Bernie) to represent another option. And lo and behold: 16 of the 17
"standard" Republicans were defeated by Trump.

Now, I don't like Trump myself, but the last election was not standard by any
stretch of the imagination. Clinton narrowly defeated Bernie in the primaries
(but Bernie did far better than expected), and Trump of course beat all
standard Republicans.

In any case, if you want a "3rd option", participate in the primaries. There
were 17 Republicans to support (with ~5 very serious contenders: Bush, Kasich,
Rubio, Cruz, and Trump) and something like 4 Democrats to support (with ~2
very serious contenders: Bernie and Clinton, although I was partial to Jim
Webb).

I personally managed to find someone in both parties that spoke to my
viewpoints: Both Bush and Kasich from the Republicans, and Jim Webb in the
Democrats. Lawrence Lessig didn't seem to be running a serious Democrat
campaign, but if he were more serious I probably would have supported him. Its
a shame that "The Wire" was so popular, because it stained Martin O'Malley
(who otherwise looked like a solid candidate).

There was a lot of choice actually.

~~~
dawnbreez
> The reason why we put up with the "lesser of two evils" is because the 3rd
> and 4th evils are the Libertarian Party and Green party respectively.

> Which I don't believe represent the people's interest in the slightest.
> Anti-vax and "What is Aleppo" stain those two.

This isn't the reason we put up with the lesser of two evils; it's simply a
symptom. The _real_ reason is that, time and time again, the majority votes
for a loud extremist instead of picking a quiet and reasonable candidate, and
the majority has shown time and time again that once they have chosen a
political stance they will happily overlook _anything_ their candidate does,
because their candidate is the lesser evil.

> Its more legitimate to attempt to usurp the parties from within (ie: Trump /
> Bernie) to represent another option. And lo and behold: 16 of the 17
> "standard" Republicans were defeated by Trump.

Theoretically correct. It's theoretically easier to convince a majority to
vote for me as a "Republican" or a "Democrat" than it is to convince everyone
to stop voting for the lesser of two evils, or to implement an alternative
vote. However, all three of these options would require that I dedicate my
life to a topic which infuriates me, instead of going about my own business.

> In any case, if you want a "3rd option", participate in the primaries. There
> were 17 Republicans to support (with ~5 very serious contenders: Bush,
> Kasich, Rubio, Cruz, and Trump) and something like 4 Democrats to support
> (with ~2 very serious contenders: Bernie and Clinton, although I was partial
> to Jim Webb).

But again, the issue of the majority comes up--because the vast majority of
people would rather vote for the lesser of two evils, and guarantee a tyrant
they agree with, instead of voting for a decent leader, and risking a tyrant
they _don 't_ agree with getting voted in by people who think _that_ tyrant is
the lesser of two evils.

> I personally managed to find someone in both parties that spoke to my
> viewpoints: Both Bush and Kasich from the Republicans, and Jim Webb in the
> Democrats. Lawrence Lessig didn't seem to be running a serious Democrat
> campaign, but if he were more serious I probably would have supported him.
> Its a shame that "The Wire" was so popular, because it stained Martin
> O'Malley (who otherwise looked like a solid candidate).

It also doesn't help that 90% of the coverage of an election is focused on the
two most questionable candidates. It _really_ doesn't help that most people
are expected to vote even if their only understanding of the political climate
is from flawed news.

> There was a lot of choice actually.

There was a lot of choice, but as of right now, none of these choices are
going to end well. I am stuck in a Prisoner's Dilemma in which I know the
other party is always choosing A. I am now choosing not to play, because I am
frustrated and have better things to do with my time than play a game of
Prisoner's Dilemma every four years.

------
nilved
Welcome to late stage capitalism, folks.

~~~
vortico
If this is what that is, I feel pretty welcome!

------
mobiletelephone
Collect data; build robot.

------
userbinator
For a second, I thought Ford had reintroduced the
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pilot](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pilot)
with an interesting new design/safety features.

------
ourmandave
The picture reminds me of the scene in _Iron Man 2_ where the Hammer
Industries attempts to copy the suit and a test video shows the suit twisting
the test pilot's top half all the way 'round.

[https://youtu.be/r2JFqC1Nvzg?t=3m9s](https://youtu.be/r2JFqC1Nvzg?t=3m9s)

------
nimbius
s/fatigue/incident rate of workers compensation/

whole lot of weasel words in here. "time away from the job" "lessen the chance
of fatigue " "reduce the physical toll on employees"

Its workplace injury, or "injury, illness and fatality" as defined by OSHA.

If the goal really is to protect workers, then bravo. If its to push the
envelope on OSHA regulations and skirt safe work environments because joe six
pack climbed into a robocop costume, then no. So far the Ekso company mostly
works in rehabilitative technology.

