ISO 13482 explained: the safety standard for personal care and service robots

ISO 13482 is the international safety standard for personal care robots: mobile servant robots, physical assistant robots and person carrier robots that work close to people outside factories. It requires the manufacturer to identify hazards, assess the risks and reduce them through design, protective measures and information for users. Its European version is a harmonised standard under the Machinery Directive until 20 January 2027.

What ISO 13482 is and where it comes from

ISO 13482 was published in 2014 under the title Robots and robotic devices – Safety requirements for personal care robots. The British edition, BS EN ISO 13482:2014, is dated 28 February 2014 and listed by BSI as current but under review. That status means a review is open, but no replacement edition appears in the catalogue.

Before 2014, the only international robot safety standard was ISO 10218, written for industrial robots. Salvini, Paez-Granados and Billard of EPFL explain that ISO 13482 was meant to complement it, covering robots that operate close to untrained members of the public in non-industrial settings such as homes, offices and public spaces.

The three robot types it covers

The standard groups personal care robots into three types, which BSI's summary names as mobile servant robots, physical assistant robots and person carrier robots:

• Mobile servant robots move around and perform tasks for people, such as handling objects or exchanging information. Reception, guide, waiter and delivery robots belong here.
• Physical assistant robots support or augment a person's physical capabilities, for example exoskeletons and other wearable devices.
• Person carrier robots transport one person or a small group to a destination, travelling at limited speed in pedestrian areas.

Some robots do more than one of these things. According to the application guide ISO/TR 23482-2:2019, as quoted in the EPFL paper, when a robot could fit more than one type, the manufacturer chooses the type, the intended use and the limits of use. For an organiser, the category in a supplier's documents is therefore the manufacturer's own statement of how the robot is meant to be used.

What the standard requires

ISO 13482 follows the risk-based method used across machinery safety. BSI describes it as setting out the hazards associated with these robots and the requirements to eliminate them or reduce the related risks to an acceptable level. Based on the EPFL analysis, the main elements are:

1. Hazard identification. An annex contains a hazard checklist ranging from battery change to localisation and navigation errors. It is explicitly not exhaustive: the manufacturer must also consider hazards arising from the particular design, the intended use and reasonably foreseeable misuse.
2. Physical contact. The standard addresses contact between robot and user in three limited forms: forces applied to the body (such as lifting a person), continuous contact (such as carrying a person) and cooperative contact (such as handing over an object).
3. Navigation and stopping. The robot is expected to avoid known safety-related obstacles and to stop when it detects a person inside its protective stop space. The later application guide adds that it should also adapt its speed to the distance and relative speed of obstacles.
4. Environment. The standard draws attention to snow, dust, water, slopes, steps and uneven ground, as well as changes in temperature and humidity.
5. Awareness and interfaces. It considers people who do not notice the robot, for example because it moves silently, and the design of controls and status signals such as power switches and fault indicators.

Two supporting documents exist. ISO/TR 23482-1:2020 describes test methods for checking conformity, and ISO/TR 23482-2:2019 is the application guide with worked examples.

What it does not cover

The scope has clear edges. BSI states that the standard is limited to earthbound robots, so flying and water-borne robots are outside it. Medical applications are excluded by definition; Bessler and colleagues point out that rehabilitation robots have their own standard, IEC 80601-2-78, published in 2019. Road vehicles are treated separately: the application guide distinguishes personal care robots from autonomous vehicles used on public roads with speed limits above 20 km/h.

Researchers have also identified gaps that matter for public venues:

• Bystanders. The EPFL authors find that the interactions defined in the standard are between the robot and its user or operator. Passers-by appear mainly as safety-related objects to be avoided, and the hazard checklist does not mention pedestrians or bystanders.
• Crowds and behaviour. The same paper argues that the standard does not address crowd density, social and proximity norms, or people's misbehaviour, including vandalism.
• Security and psychological hazards. The authors also conclude that the 2014 text does not consider security threats or the psychological hazards that can arise when robots serve in public spaces.
• Unpredictable behaviour. A safety assessment review of a dressing-assistance robot notes that current reference standards still assume deterministic and known actions, which fits poorly with robots whose behaviour is learned or adaptive.

Why it is an imperfect fit for legged humanoids

The certified examples listed in the EPFL paper in 2020 were guide robots, delivery robots, walking-assistance devices and wheel-based humanoid robots. According to the application guide cited there, the three categories reflected the robot types most commercialised when the standard was published.

A walking humanoid or a robot dog used as a greeter could be described as a mobile servant robot by its intended use. But the 2014 text predates the current generation of commercially available legged humanoids and robot dogs. None of the sources checked for this article indicate that it contains requirements specific to a robot that must actively keep its balance, can fall if power or control is lost, or has to recover from a push. Those questions are the subject of a separate ISO project, described in our article on ISO 25785-1 for legged and humanoid robots.

A supplier's statement that a legged humanoid follows ISO 13482 is therefore not meaningless, but it should lead to follow-up questions about how falls, stability and stopping were assessed.

Its legal role in the EU, and what changes in 2027

Standards are voluntary. The European Commission describes EU machinery law as a combination of mandatory essential health and safety requirements and voluntary harmonised standards. According to the Commission's summary list of harmonised standards, generated on 28 October 2026, EN ISO 13482:2014 has been cited in the Official Journal under the Machinery Directive since 11 July 2014. A cited harmonised standard gives a presumption of conformity with the requirements it covers.

The same list records 20 January 2027 as the end of its legal effect under the Directive. The Commission's harmonised standards page for machinery explains why: the Machinery Regulation (EU) 2023/1230 repeals the Directive on that date, and a new implementing decision under the Regulation is being prepared that will feature the vast majority of standards currently cited. The sources checked do not say which standards will be included, so it is not yet confirmed whether EN ISO 13482:2014 will be carried over.

The Commission notes that the Regulation adds provisions for AI-powered safety functions and for the cyber-safety of safety-relevant software and control systems, areas the 2014 standard barely touches. Our explainer on the Machinery Regulation and humanoid robots covers the changes in more detail. This article is general information, not legal advice.

What this means for event organisers

• Ask what the paperwork actually references. Request the EU declaration of conformity and the list of standards applied, and note which ISO 13482 robot type and intended use the manufacturer declared. Add this to your brief to robot suppliers.
• Check that your use matches the declared use. A robot assessed as an indoor servant robot has not automatically been assessed for a crowded outdoor festival or for children climbing on it.
• Plan for bystanders yourself. Because the standard centres on users and operators, crowd flow, barriers, operator presence and stop procedures remain part of your own safety planning for public events.
• For legged robots, ask about falls. Ask how the supplier handles loss of balance, emergency stops and safe distances, because ISO 13482 on its own does not answer these questions.
• Treat cybersecurity as a separate topic. Connected robots fall under other EU rules, covered in our article on cybersecurity rules for connected robots.

Frequently asked questions

Is ISO 13482 certification mandatory for robots used at events?

No. Standards are voluntary. In the EU, machinery must meet the essential health and safety requirements of machinery law, and applying a harmonised standard such as EN ISO 13482:2014 is one recognised way to show this. A manufacturer may use other means. Organisers should ask for the EU declaration of conformity and the standards it lists. This is general information, not legal advice.

Does ISO 13482 apply to humanoid robots and robot dogs?

It can, depending on intended use: a humanoid working as a greeter or guide may be assessed as a mobile servant robot, and wheel-based humanoids had been certified to it by 2020. However, the 2014 text was not written with dynamically balancing legged robots in mind, so questions about falls and stability need separate answers. ISO is developing a separate standard for legged robots.

What happens to EN ISO 13482 when the EU Machinery Regulation applies in 2027?

The European Commission's list shows 20 January 2027 as the end of its legal effect under the Machinery Directive, because the Directive is repealed that day. The Commission says a new implementing decision under Regulation (EU) 2023/1230 will feature the vast majority of currently cited standards, but the sources checked do not confirm whether EN ISO 13482:2014 will be included.

What is the difference between ISO 13482 and ISO 10218?

ISO 10218 covers industrial robots and industrial robot applications, typically in controlled workplaces with trained staff; its 2025 editions are now cited under the Machinery Directive. ISO 13482 covers personal care robots that work close to untrained people in non-industrial settings, such as servant robots, exoskeletons and person carriers. A robot used at a public event is usually closer to the ISO 13482 situation.

How this article was made: written by the humanoid4rent editorial team with AI assistance; every factual statement was checked against the sources listed below on 2026-11-02. Spotted an error? Write to info@humanoid4rent.com.