A robot manufacturer’s manual is, before it is a user guide, the first document a certification authority examines. As Part 1 of this series established, the manual and its labeling are themselves the object of certification review, and robot safety regulations specify exactly what must appear — and in what form — in the manual, on labels, and in safety markings. This installment applies that principle to next-generation robotics and smart logistics — fixed and collaborative robots, autonomous mobile robots (AMRs/AGVs), and wearable robots (exoskeletons) — and, centered on the 2025 ISO 10218 revision, maps the document requirements a robot manufacturer’s manual must carry.
Why the Manufacturer’s Manual Is the Starting Point of Certification
In robot safety regulation, the manual is not an accessory; it is part of the conformity evidence. ISO 10218-1 directly specifies the information, safety warnings, use limits, and residual-risk disclosures a manufacturer must include in the manual for the robot itself. And because the manufacturer’s manual becomes the base document for every later stage — on-site installation and integration, certification review, and shipment into other markets — a single omitted line or ambiguous phrase here propagates through the entire chain that follows.
When a robot is integrated into a work cell, that integration stage requires its own manual (ISO 10218-2) — yet even that integration manual is built on the manufacturer’s manual. A robot manual, in other words, is not a user-only document: it is the document that regulators, certification bodies, and integration sites read first, and its starting point is always the manufacturer’s own.
What the 2025 Revision Newly Requires in the Robot Manual
ISO 10218 was extensively revised in 2025. There are three changes a manufacturer must verify against its own manual.
- Collaborative application: With the former ISO/TS 15066 absorbed into the ISO 10218 series (Parts 1 and 2), applications that permit human–robot contact must state contact-force and pressure limits per body region in the manual, on labels, and in the user guidance. The shift from the category “collaborative robot” to the term “collaborative application” should also be reflected in the document’s wording.
- Reference to the instruction-handbook standard (ISO 20607): The revision strengthened alignment with ISO 20607, the general drafting principles for machinery instruction handbooks.
- Cybersecurity requirements: Security-related information for networked robots is now treated as part of the safety information.
The question reduces to one — does your existing manual reflect the 2025 revision?
Safety Messages and Document Structure — Authoring, Not Translation
What regulation requires is not that “safety information is present” but that safety messages are precisely designed in a prescribed form. For the US market, safety messages must follow ANSI Z535.6 — signal words (DANGER, WARNING, CAUTION, NOTICE) and the hazard / consequence / avoidance structure — while the overall organization and structure of the manual is governed by IEC/IEEE 82079-1.
This is not the work of moving language across; it is authoring — designing information to regulatory requirements. A manufacturer’s engineers know the robot best, but the capability to translate that knowledge into the document form regulations demand is often absent in-house. That is precisely where outside expertise is needed.
The Document Duties That Come With Each Market
In the United States, ISO 10218-1 and -2:2025 were adopted nationally as ANSI/A3 R15.06-2025 in August 2025 — a three-part structure (manufacturer, Part 1; integrator, Part 2; user, Part 3) that makes explicit how far the manufacturer’s document is responsible. Autonomous mobile robots (AMRs and AGVs) have their manuals and safety markings governed directly by ISO 3691-4. And the moment a robot ships beyond the US, destination rules add their own — the EU Machinery Regulation (EU 2023/1230), applicable from 2027, strengthens instructions-for-use requirements, including digital delivery. What a manufacturer’s manual must contain is set not at launch but market by market.
One addition worth noting: wearable robots (exoskeletons) follow not the ISO 10218 framework but the ISO 13482, ISO/TR 23482-1, and ASTM F48 family. Because their point of completion is not a system-integration cell but the wearer’s body and task, a manufacturer must also account for a manual that carries body-measurement, fitting, and contraindicated-user information.
Robot Standards at a Glance — What Each Requires in the Document
The core standards that directly affect a robot manufacturer’s manual, and what each requires in the document and its markings, are as follows.
| Standard | What it requires in the manual / markings |
|---|---|
| ISO 10218-1:2025 | Robot information, safety warnings, use limits, residual-risk disclosures; contact-force and pressure limits per body region for collaborative applications; cybersecurity information |
| ISO 3691-4 | Manuals and safety markings for autonomous mobile robots (AMRs) and automated guided vehicles (AGVs) |
| ISO 13482 / ASTM F48 family | Safety, risk-management, and fit-accommodation information for wearable robots (exoskeletons); documentation of contraindicated-user and fitting requirements |
| ANSI Z535.6 | Signal-word system (DANGER / WARNING / CAUTION / NOTICE) and the format and structure of safety messages (US market) |
| IEC/IEEE 82079-1 | Organization, structure, and drafting principles for all information for use (all markets) |
| ANSI/A3 R15.06-2025 | US national adoption; separation of manufacturer / integrator / user responsibility |
| ISO 20607 | General drafting principles for machinery instruction handbooks |
What Hansem Global Does — and Does Not Do
To be clear: Hansem Global is not a firm that judges whether a given robot meets ISO 10218. Conformity judgment belongs to the manufacturer’s engineers, to certification bodies, and to functional-safety experts. Hansem’s role is to design and produce the document so that those judgments and the regulatory requirements are reflected — accurately and without omission — in the manual, on labels, and in safety markings.
Concretely, that means authoring the requirements this article has laid out: rendering contact-force and pressure limits, use limits and residual risks, and cybersecurity information into the IEC/IEEE 82079-1 structure; designing them as ANSI Z535.6 safety messages (signal word, hazard, consequence, avoidance); and re-reflecting them across every released language each time firmware or control software is updated.
This capability is backed by 35 years of manual production, two decades of zero-incident multilingual delivery, and in-house QA tooling. What a manufacturer gets from Hansem is not “hands that render text into many languages” but “a head that knows what regulations require in the document.”
Frequently Asked Questions
Q. Is a robot manual itself a direct object of certification review?
A. Yes. Robot safety regulation evaluates not only the product’s safety but whether the manual, labels, and safety markings are written to the rules. The manual is the starting-point document for certification, integration, and market entry.
Q. What does the 2025 ISO 10218 revision require you to add to the manual?
A. The essentials are contact-force and pressure limits per body region for collaborative applications, alignment with ISO 20607, and cybersecurity information. Existing manuals should be checked for all three.
Q. Do wearable robots (exoskeletons) follow the same standards?
A. No. Exoskeletons follow not ISO 10218 but the ISO 13482, ISO/TR 23482-1, and ASTM F48 family, which add documentation requirements specific to worn devices — body measurement, fitting, and contraindicated-user information.
Q. Does Hansem certify our robot’s regulatory conformity?
A. No. Conformity judgment belongs to certification bodies and functional-safety experts. Hansem authors the items regulations require in the document, in the prescribed form and without omission.
Coming Next in the Series
This series maps the manual-regulation coordinates of each industry and the hardest points of multilingual operation. The next installment is the series conclusion: it takes the one fact confirmed again and again across medical devices, heavy equipment, and robotics — that the manual is the first record a regulator reviews — and ties it to the trends of the coming decade (multilingual mandates, digital accessibility, and eIFU).
A robot manual is not a user-only guide. At the starting point of certification, integration, and market entry, it is the first document a regulator reads. Check now what the 2025 revision newly requires — and reopen your manual.
Hansem Global is a language-service company that has produced multilingual manuals for global manufacturers for 35 years, since its founding in 1990. It holds 35 years of zero-incident manual production and two decades of zero-incident multilingual manual delivery, with four international certifications (ISO 9001, 17100, 27001, 18587). Ranked the world’s No. 49 LSP in CSA Research’s 2025 report, Hansem Global serves manufacturers across global markets.