Page 10 - Demo

10continued on page 12In turn, this requires confronting the obstacles to innovation that beset our industry, from cultural resistance to process problems. It also requires replacing linear methodologies with a holistic approach, so that innovation is not narrowly conceived as a technical update but is integrated with its environment. The challenges are considerable, but so too are the potential benefits.Fits Like a Glovebox One of the principal problems with applying robotics to gloveboxes is that no two gloveboxes are the same. Each glovebox presents its own mix of needs and challenges. Operators will possess specific knowledge gained through their experience, without which the glovebox operations would not be as effective. Yet glovebox operators all face similar challenges and threats. First and foremost is safety. Glovebox operators are well-protected, but the threat to their health is ever-present. One miniscule hole in the fabric of their gloves could be enough exposure to cause serious long-term harm. This risk can be mitigated by safety procedures and training but is never entirely absent. Moreover, glovebox operators are all beset by challenges to their capacity. Much of the work inside the glovebox is slow, laborious, and repetitive. It%u2019s also difficult to speed up. Glovebox operators have the right skills but lack the tools to really capitalise on them. This linear, one-task-at-a-time methodology can increase the pressure on operators, especially when critical operations depend on their physical presence. Efficiency is difficult to achieve, in part because operational methods tend to be linear and labour-intensive. Given that glovebox operations are central to critical aspects of nuclear power, reprocessing, and decommissioning, bottlenecks in efficiency or capacity can throttle productivity downstream. For example, decommissioning nuclear plants requires significant numbers of operators. Without sufficient glovebox operators, nuclear sites may struggle to progress with decommissioning within the necessary timescales. Consequently, this increases cost - the longer it%u2019s left standing, the longer staff are required for safeguarding, monitoring, and eventual decommissioning.Iterate to InnovateInnovation is always difficult, but in highly regulated, mission-critical industries like nuclear, it%u2019s especially hard. That%u2019s why it%u2019s important to de-risk the process of innovation itself. By pinpointing specific, high yield use cases, informing the design with the insights of users and other stakeholders, and proceeding in a modular, iterative fashion, much of the uncertainty and risk around innovation is mitigated. Sellafield demonstrates the importance of each of these factors. As the UK%u2019s oldest nuclear facility, and one of its largest, the Sellafield site has been processing since the 1940s and began its decommissioning journey in 2016. Sellafield%u2019s size and longevity mean that its decommissioning process is correspondingly complex. Its considerable buildings inventory includes older high hazard plants posing greater risk. Gloveboxes pose a particular challenge to decommissioning. Sellafield depends on gloveboxes for the safe handling of nuclear materials. However, disposing of the gloveboxes themselves presents a significant challenge of its own. If they are broken into pieces, those involved in their dismantling will be exposed to the nuclear contaminants that the gloveboxes release when they come apart - even after significant cleaning and decontamination. Yet even prior to decommissioning, Sellafield suffered a radioactive contaminant exposure incident to one of their glovebox operators. In 2017, an operator received a small puncture wound in their finger which continued from page 8Top and Bottom: Self-supporting Robotic arm manoeuvring within a glovebox