SCIENCE ROBOTICS | REVIEW

SOFT ROBOTICS

Soft robotics: Technologies and systems pushing the

boundaries of robot abilities

2016 The Authors,

some rights reserved;
exclusive licensee
American Association
for the Advancement
of Science.

Cecilia Laschi,1* Barbara Mazzolai,2 Matteo Cianchetti1

The proliferation of soft robotics research worldwide has brought substantial achievements in terms of principles,
models, technologies, techniques, and prototypes of soft robots. Such achievements are reviewed here in terms of
the abilities that they provide robots that were not possible before. An analysis of the evolution of this field shows
how, after a few pioneering works in the years 2009 to 2012, breakthrough results were obtained by taking seminal technological and scientific challenges related to soft robotics from actuation and sensing to modeling and control. Further
progress in soft robotics research has produced achievements that are important in terms of robot abilitiesthat is, from
the viewpoint of what robots can do today thanks to the soft robotics approach. Abilities such as squeezing, stretching,
climbing, growing, and morphing would not be possible with an approach based only on rigid links. The challenge ahead
for soft robotics is to further develop the abilities for robots to grow, evolve, self-heal, develop, and biodegrade, which are
the ways that robots can adapt their morphology to the environment.
INTRODUCTION

Robotics is the science of building machines with desired abilities of

movement, perception, and cognition, and robots are machines
intended to perform tasks in the service of human beings. They were
recently revealed to be excellent tools for research in science (1). Robot
abilities have progressed in terms of the complexity and the precision
of movements, as well as the accuracy of motion control and the level
of intelligence (2), and such a progression of abilities is the ultimate
goal in robotics. Although especially advanced in the industrial
manufacturing context, robots are becoming ubiquitous, and so
they are expected to soon be used in many tasks and scenarios. The
use of soft matter for building robots (3) has been recognized as the
current challenge (4) for pushing the boundaries of robotics technologies and building robotic systems for service tasks in natural environments (5). Softness can be intended in various ways: soft texture,
soft and deformable materials, soft movement, elastic materials and
variable compliance actuators, and soft in friendly and natural interactions with people (6). The compliance and the elasticity of soft body
parts allow reactions with interaction forces without control and
support the bioinspired approach that is increasingly being adopted
in robotics, as well as in many other disciplines (7). The study of living
organisms can shed light on principles that can be fruitfully adopted
to develop additional robot abilities or to facilitate more efficient
accomplishment of tasks (8), because living organisms exploit soft
tissues and compliant structures to move effectively in complex natural
environments (9).
The term soft robotics was formerly used to indicate robots
with rigid links and mechanically (or passively) compliant joints
with variable stiffness (10), or compliance or impedance control
(11), which is beyond the scope of this paper. Soft robotics was then
used to underline the shift from robots with rigid links to bioinspired
continuum robots that are inherently compliant and exhibit large
strains in normal operations (12). Then, the following definition
was given (13): soft robotic manipulators are continuum robots made
of soft materials that undergo continuous elastic deformation and produce motion through the generation of a smooth backbone curve
1
BioRobotics Institute, Scuola Superiore SantAnna, Pisa, Italy. 2Center for MicroBioRobotics, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Pontedera, Italy.
*Corresponding author. Email: cecilia.laschi@sssup.it

Laschi, Mazzolai, Cianchetti, Sci. Robot. 1, eaah3690 (2016)

6 December 2016

(14). This definition refers to a seminal paper (14) in which continuum robots are defined as capable of bending via elastic deformation. In Trivedi et al. (13), soft robots are distinct from traditional
robots, which have rigid links, and serpentine robots, which have
a large number of short rigid links and degrees of freedom: Thus,
soft robotics has primarily involved construction from soft materials
and intentionally compliant structures. The review in (9) simply refers to soft-bodied robots in an analogy with soft-bodied animals. In
(15), soft robots are defined as robots built with soft materials. Recalling the definition given by the RoboSoft (16) community, in (17),
soft robots are defined as soft robots/devices that can actively interact with the environment and can undergo large deformations relying on inherent or structural compliance. The review in (5) instead
defines soft robots in terms of the Youngs modulus of a material:
systems that are capable of autonomous behavior, and that are primarily composed of materials with moduli in the range of that of soft
biological materials. The definition of soft robotics given in (3) uses
both the well-known concept of soft matter applied to materials and
the term soft-matter robotics. Here, we refer to the RoboSoft definition, which focuses on compliance and deformability in the interaction with the environment.
One of the main benefits of the compliance possessed by soft robots
is that they can implement embodied intelligence principles (for example, preflexes). They can also conform to surfaces or objects, absorb
energy to maintain stability, and exhibit physical robustness and humansafe operation at potentially low cost. Figure 1 shows a pictorial spectrum
of soft robot approaches: from robots built mostly from rigid materials
(with rigid links and joints and few intentionally compliant structures) to
completely soft robots. The spectrum passes through a variety of robots
built with soft materials or deformable structures, with few rigid parts for
support or integration of components. Such soft robots compose the vast
majority today, and they are expected to be used most in diverse soft
robotics applications.
We review the current achievements of soft robotics, showing how
the use of soft materials or deformable structures stands as a gateway
toward more advanced or more efficient robot abilities that were not
possible before. We first present a review of how this field evolved,
reporting on the first examples and publications of relevant soft robotics technologies and systems but excluding the soft robots ante litteram, that is, the very first examples of soft robots, dating back to the
1 of 11

SCIENCE ROBOTICS | REVIEW

Fig. 1. Spectrum of soft robots approaches grading from mostly stiff with a few selectively compliant elements (left) to entirely soft (right). From left: the iSprawl robot
with flexible elements to accommodate external inputs and repositioning of the legs (97); X-RHex with variable compliant legs to optimize running speed (98); soft gripper
counting on four flexible fluidic fingers lodged on rigid handle (99); soft robotic fish with flexible tail actuated by FFAs (100); OCTOPUS is an underwater robot composed of a
rigid frame where eight soft arms are lodged (six tendon-driven arms for locomotion and two SMA-based arms for manipulation) (17); the PoseiDRONE robot swims using the
tendon-based soft thruster, and it has four arms for locomotion on the seafloor (101); universal gripper based on granular jamming phenomenon, thus granular material, an elastic
membrane and a rigid interface for the application vacuum (31); origami robot can change its shape through the activation of shape memory materials and composed of rigid
polymers or paper but flexible along bending lines (102); Tuft Softworm is a bioinspired soft robot that can replicate a caterpillar-like locomotion through the sequential activation
of SMA actuators (103); rehabilitation glove for human hands based on FFAs (PneuNets) (56); inflatable robots are based on multiple inflatable chambers whose shape determines
the robot motion (52); Octobot is completely made of soft elastomers and actuated by chemical reactions (104). [Credits (left to right): iSprawl, M. Cutkosky; X-RHex, K. C. Galloway;
soft robotic fish, D. Rus; OCTOPUS robot, photographer J. Hills; PoseiDRONE robot, photographer M. Brega; universal gripper, 2012 IEEE, reprinted with permission from (31);
Origami robot, J. K. Paik; Softworm, B. A. Trimmer; soft robotic glove, P. Polygerinos; inflatable robot, 2012 IEEE, reprinted with permission from (52); Octobot, J. A. Lewis].

80s and 90s, not named as such (18, 19). We then present an analysis
of the current state of the art in terms of robot abilities and the latest
achievements, described from the viewpoint of what robots can do today thanks to the soft robotics approach.

ential SMA (26) springs, which contract and deform a mesh structure, alternatively increasing and decreasing in diameter and length
(27). The final soft robot showed peristaltic locomotion at a speed of
3.47 mm/s (with a theoretical speed of 3.99 mm/s) and demonstrated
resistance to several impacts of a rubber hammer (28).

SOFT ROBOTICS EVOLUTION: SEMINAL

TECHNOLOGICAL ACHIEVEMENTS

The challenge of stiffening

A mass of granular material encased in an elastic membrane can pass
from being a very soft body to a completely stiff one when a vacuum is
applied. The stiffness can increase up to 40-fold [for example, from 0.2
to 7.8 N/mm (29)]. This principle can be used as a mechanism for
shape changing, mobility (30), and, most importantly, stiffness variation (31). It was the first solution proposed in soft robotics, although
others are used today, as reviewed in (32) and discussed in the next
section. A soft, granular jamming body can deform and adapt, for example, to the shape of an object to grasp; when stiffened, it can keep
its shape. This wide-range, simple to control, energetically efficient
stiffening mechanism is now widely used in soft robotics.

Soft robotics stems from robotics, especially in the quest for robots
operating in our natural environment, in the service of human beings.
At the same time, the embodied intelligence paradigm (20) suggests
that a soft body partly controls movements by deforming, adapting,
and reacting to interaction forces. The desired behavior can be obtained efficiently through morphological computation by exploiting
interaction forces and compliance instead of fighting them (21).
The first soft robots: The challenge of actuation
Good examples of the first soft robots are the arms inspired by the muscular hydrostats of the arms and tentacles of cephalopods and the
trunks of elephants, such as the OctArm, first presented in (22) and
then developed in increasingly refined versions up to version VI
(12, 13). The OctArm is pneumatically actuated, and it has a backbone
without joints. The continuum yet strong structure allows it to lift and
manipulate objects with different dimensions and weights. Trivedi
et al. (12) report a few other examples of soft robots based on EAP
[electroactive polymers; (23)] and PAM [pneumatic artificial muscles;
(24)] technologies that can bend, contract, and extend. Another example is the caterpillar-like robot built with silicone rubber and actuated
by shape memory alloy (SMA) springs: It was first presented in (25)
and then evolved toward more advanced versions. SMA springs have
also been used to replicate an interesting mechanism for soft robot
locomotion that exploits deformability based on peristalsis. The hydrostat skeleton structure of Oligochaeta (for example, earthworm) has been
implemented in a robot (Meshworm) with longitudinal and circumferLaschi, Mazzolai, Cianchetti, Sci. Robot. 1, eaah3690 (2016)

6 December 2016

The birth of the Pneu-Net approach and the

fabrication challenge
Although pneumatic actuation has long been used in robotics, the socalled Pneu-Net approach has been proposed recently, and it is widely
used today in soft robotics: By appropriately designing chambers in
elastomeric polymers, pneumatic actuation can deform soft bodies
in a controlled way. The first example, presented in (33), was a pneumatically actuated robot composed exclusively of soft materials
(elastomeric polymers) and capable of quadrupedal locomotion. It demonstrated some of the advantages of soft robots, such as the deformability that is useful for passing through small apertures. This work
also proposed fabrication technologies for soft robots, which need unconventional approaches. For the most part, soft materials cannot actively be shapedthat is, they cannot be machined, sculpted, ground,
or forged; instead, they have to be molded, as in (33), or extruded.
2 of 11

SCIENCE ROBOTICS | REVIEW

Multimaterial three-dimensional (3D) printers that can work with a mix
of hard and soft materials are making soft robots easier to fabricate today, although finishing of soft robot surfaces cannot achieve the accuracy of machined surfaces, and the mechanical properties of the printable
materials are still limited (for example, in terms of elongation at break).
The octopus-inspired challenges of actuation, sensing,
modeling, and control
Research inspired by the common octopus (34) faced a number of
challenges in the development of soft components and integrated soft
robotics systems. With a completely boneless body, an octopus can
stretch and stiffen with enough strength for grasping, manipulation,
locomotion, and swimming, thus providing an ideal model for new
principles for the actuation and control of soft materials, such as EAP
muscles (35) and SMA springs (36) arranged in an octopus-like muscular hydrostat (37). The development of the integrated eight-arm
OCTOPUS robot (17) started a number of directions for the investigation of soft robotics and produced the first results for fields that are
now extensively investigated in soft robotics, such as modeling and
controlling of these continuum structures (38, 39) and their fluidodynamics (40), exploiting their morphological computation (41), fabricating a stretchable sensitive skin (42), understanding and
implementing the sucker adhesion mechanisms in water (43, 44),
and deriving principles for locomotion (45) and swimming (46).
Modeling and controlling soft robots have been approached by using
the techniques for modeling of continuum robots (47, 48), because
the techniques for modeling the kinematics and the dynamics of traditional multilink robots become inapplicable. The modeling work in
(38) was based on a geometrically exact Cosserat approach, whereas
the work in (39) used the model for applying a Jacobian method to
control positioning. Sensorizing soft robots also requires unconventional approaches for detecting deformations in soft robots
without introducing rigid components into the system, such as flexible and stretchable electronics and sensors, which have been investigated since 2004 (49). Among the first works in flexible sensors for
soft robots was the development of a contactless deflection sensor
with a light-emitting diode (LED) element and a photodiode placed
onto two connected substrates. The deflection angle between the two
planes can be extracted from the LED light intensity detected at the
photodiode because of the bell-shaped angular intensity profile of the
emitted light, which has a range of deflection of 105 to 180 with a resolution close to 1. This sensor can be used to detect the deformations of
a soft robot body (50). Flexible electronics for stretchable circuitry is the
key for building origami robots (51) with actuators consisting of an annealed SMA actuator and a heater, with the capability of changing shape,
that is, folding themselves from a 2D to a 3D shape.
Inflatable robots
A quite interesting approach is the use of textile materials for building
inflatable robots. After the seminal work from the 80s reported in
(18), a manipulator was presented in (52), whose design was based
on a strong fabric and a tight chamber that could be inflated. Actuation was carried out with the aid of tendons and pulleys.
Evolutionary approaches for soft robotics
The soft approach to building robots soon enlarged the space of design parameters to a level that is difficult for a human designer to
manage. They include morphological parameters, a number of
mechanical properties, and environmental specifications and paramLaschi, Mazzolai, Cianchetti, Sci. Robot. 1, eaah3690 (2016)

6 December 2016

eters related to the interaction with the environment. Interesting

approaches to coping with this challenge are the use of evolutionary
algorithms for exploring such a huge design parameter space and the
development of methods for the automatic design of soft robots (53).
Evolution is simulated with genetic algorithms, and evolutionary robotics has achieved important results, encouraging the application of
this approach to the design and construction of new robots. Morphological changes within the same individual robot are still under
investigation. Recent results with simulated robots that evolve by
enlarging/shrinking their body units show how soft materials help
the robot morphology to change in response to a stimulus by taking
into account morphological computation (54).
First applications of soft robots
While enabling technologies have been progressing, the soft robotics approach has been used for building integrated systems in different
application scenarios. For example, in the biomedical field, surgical
instruments are an ideal application for soft robotics (55), and soft
robotics is finding applications in rehabilitation (56) and assistance
(5759). Other interesting areas for the application of soft robots
are explorations and rescues (60, 61), which are deeply related to unstructured environments.

WHERE SOFT ROBOTS DARE: ABILITIES THAT SOFT ROBOTS

HAVE OBTAINED

Starting from the pioneering works described in the previous sections,

soft robotics has achieved important results that we analyze here in
terms of the abilities provided to robots. Such abilities attained by soft
robots are not just different ways to perform usual robot functions,
such as grasping or locomotion; they are capabilities for performing
actions, such as squeezing, stretching, climbing, and growing, that
would not be possible with an approach to robot design based on rigid
links only. In our definition, an ability is not related to a possible
application. Instead, applications of an ability can eventually materialize in diverse fields. The integration of soft-matter technologies with
morphological computation and embodied intelligence paradigms has
substantially contributed to an increase in the abilities of soft robots,
which show improved performance in real environments compared
with their more traditional relatives. Table 1 summarizes the robot
abilities obtained by exploiting soft materials and deformable
structures, gives references to the robots described in the following
and the related bibliography, and recalls the key principles and technologies adopted.
Jumping
An interesting jumping ability (up to six body heights) is achieved in
the combustion-powered robot presented in (62), whose body is based
on a stiffness gradient obtained by multimaterial 3D printing (Fig.
2A). By using explosive chemical reactions, the actuation of PneuNet was greatly improved (63) in terms of speed and power, facilitating jumping abilities in soft robots.
GoQBot is a soft robot inspired by some species of caterpillars that
can show rolling locomotion as a jumping escape mechanism, which
is among the fastest self-propelled wheeling behaviors in nature (Fig.
2B) (64). Inspired by this behavior, GoQBot can reach 1g acceleration
and an angular velocity of more than 200 rpm. This capability of
adapting to perform different behaviors also makes GoQBot an example of a morphing robot.
3 of 11

SCIENCE ROBOTICS | REVIEW

Table 1. Summary of the robot abilities reviewed, the robots they are attributed to, and the key technologies or principles that allowed the
achievement of these abilities.
Ability

Applied on

Key technology/key principle

Reference

GoQBot

Fast-contracting SMAs

(64)

Tripedal robot

Pneu-Net powered by combustion

(63)

Hemispheroid robot

Functionally graded and powered by combustion

(62)

Meshworm

Flexible braided sleeve and SMAs

(65)

Softworm

Flexible braided mesh and tendons

(66)

Quadrupedal robot

Pneu-Net

(33)

Cockroach-like platform

Origami-style structure

(69)

Resilience

Quadrupedal robot

Pneu-Net

(61)

Arm elongation and shortening

OCTOPUS robot

Flexible braided sleeve and SMAs

(36)

Jumping

Peristaltic locomotion

Locomotion through
small crevices

OCTOPUS robot

(45)

Underwater legged locomotion

Octopus-inspired pushing by stiffening and elongation

PoseiDRONE robot

(71)

Pulsed-jet swimming

PoseiDRONE robot

Vortex rings produced with body squeezing

(46)

Stretchability

Sensing skin of
crawling robot

HLEC

Climbing

Stickybot

Hierarchical structures, directional adhesion, and control of tangential

contact forces

(67)

Growing

PLANTOID

Additive manufacturing

(74)

Combined bending
and stiffening

STIFF-FLOP
manipulator

FFAs and granular jamming

RBO Hand 2

PneuFlex actuators

(83)

Universal gripper

Granular jamming phenomenon

(31)

Mechanism

Origami-style structure and shape memory materials

(73)

(77)

Adaptable grasping
(78)
Self-deployment

(79)
Morphing, self-reconfigurability

Manipulator

Self-healing

Soft pneumatic actuators

Biodegradability and edibility

Actuator

HMAs

(86)

DA polymers

(88)

Polyaramid fibers in an elastomeric matrix

(89)

Biodegradable hydrogels

(90)

Peristaltic locomotion
Studies of how animals move using peristaltic locomotion have suggested that a sinusoidal deformation of a soft continuous structure is
the most suitable way to implement it. Continuous wave peristaltic
motion has been achieved by exploiting sleeves and tubular meshes composed of thin flexible threads (such as the one used in McKibben
actuators). Such a structure is a key element for generating peristalticlike motion because it has the capability to translate a radial deformation into a longitudinal one. A reduction of the diameter is thus
transformed into an elongation. By combining several actuation
units lodged along the structure and activating them in the right
sequence, it is possible to generate a continuous wave of deformation. So far, this mechanism has been implemented using SMAs in
the Meshworm robot (65) and motor-driven tendons in the Softworm robot (Fig. 2C) (66).
Laschi, Mazzolai, Cianchetti, Sci. Robot. 1, eaah3690 (2016)

6 December 2016

Climbing
A bioinspired approach coupled with soft-matter technologies led to
the development of robots with the ability to climb walls and vertical
surfaces. This is the case of Stickybot (Fig. 2D) (67), a gecko-inspired
robot that exploits some of the enabling features of its animal counterpart. The ability of the animal to climb with dry adhesion is assured by a combination of functions, which include the use of van
der Waals forces generated by an intimate conformability of hierarchical system of lamellae, setal stalks, and spatular tips to both rough
and smooth surfaces; directional and controllable position of the adhesive structures; a high cycle rate of attachment release (steps per
second); and self-cleaning of the geckos feet, aided by the smaller
dimensions of the terminal spatula with respect to the size of dirt
particles (68). Stickybot uses several design principles translated from
the animal, such as the hierarchical structures, directional adhesion,
4 of 11

SCIENCE ROBOTICS | REVIEW

Fig. 2. (A) 3D-printed stiffness-graded robot jumping by combustion (62). (B) GoQBot morphing into a Q shape and jumping (64). (C) Softworm peristaltic robot (66).
(D) Stickybot climbing on a glass surface by exploiting the hierarchical microstructure of its soft feet (67). [Credits (A to D): N. W. Bartlett; GoQbot, B. A. Trimmer;
Softworm peristaltic robot, R. D. Quinn; Stickybot, M. Cutkosky].

and control of tangential contact forces, to achieve adhesion control.

Bioinspired force control strategies, innovative fabrication methods,
and soft-matter technologies supply the robot with compliant structures on the toes (based on arrays of small, angled polymer stalks)
and on other parts of the body, which balance forces among the feet
and promote smooth attachment and detachment of the toes.
Squeezability: Locomotion through small crevices
and resilience
Quadrupedal locomotion has been implemented in a soft tetrapod robot that can control each leg independently by using a network of
pneumatic channels for each limb and another channel dedicated to
the spine of the robot (33). The completely soft robot, fabricated using
soft lithography, shows the ability to locomote through small crevices
(Fig. 3A). On a larger scale, this approach was implemented in a soft
robot made of 0.65-m-long silicone elastomer, which is innately resilient to a variety of adverse environmental conditions, including snow,
puddles of water, direct (albeit limited) exposure to flames, and the
crushing force of being run over by an automobile (Fig. 3B) (61).
The same ability of squeezing to fit small apertures is exhibited by
a robot inspired by cockroaches (69). Their jointed exoskeletons permit rapid appendage-driven locomotion but retain their soft-bodied,
shape-changing ability. Like the animal, the robot successfully locomotes in vertically confined spaces by compressing its body by half
(54%; 75 to 35 mm). The robot shell can withstand compressive
forces (a 1-kg weight) that are 20 times its body mass through its
overlapping abdominal plates, and it can dissipate impacts and collisions, demonstrating the capabilities of robots constructed using soft
materials (Fig. 3C).
Elongation and shortening
Softness, stretchability, and conformability are some of the capabilities
that make cephalopods such as octopuses as models for excellence in
soft robotics. The octopus arm is an ideal model for robot arms that
can bend in any direction, elongate, and shorten. Such abilities have
been reached in the OCTOPUS robot with the longitudinal and transversal arrangement of SMA springs in a braided conical sheath, which
takes inspiration from the muscle arrangement of the mollusk muscular hydrostat (37). The OCTOPUS arm can reduce its diameter by
25%, consequently elongating by 41.3% (70).
Laschi, Mazzolai, Cianchetti, Sci. Robot. 1, eaah3690 (2016)

6 December 2016

Underwater legged locomotion

Although legged locomotion has been extensively investigated in robotics as an appropriate way to negotiate rough terrain, underwater
legged locomotion, which could allow exploration of the benthic zone,
is still an open challenge. With inspiration from the octopus, models for
underwater legged locomotion have been developed on the basis of appropriate compliance of the legs. The OCTOPUS and PoseiDRONE soft
robots, with silicone-based legs, show adaptive walking behavior (45, 71).
Pulsed-jet swimming
Cephalopods also inspired pulsed-jet swimming, which exploits the
deformability of their soft bodies. Water expelled through a funnel
generates propulsion, which is optimized by body and funnel size
and by the frequency of the contractions that expel water. A model
of the deformations of a soft body combined with a model of the fluidodynamics of pulsed-jet propulsion allowed for the design of an optimized propelling body in the PoseiDRONE soft robot with pulsed-jet
swimming abilities (Fig. 3D) (72).
Stretchability
Softness, stretchability, and conformability in mollusks have recently
led to the development of a hyperelastic light-emitting capacitor
(HLEC) that enables both light emission and touch sensing in a thin
rubber sheet, which stretches to >480% strain (73). These HLECs are
composed of layers of transparent hydrogel electrodes sandwiching a
ZnS phosphordoped dielectric elastomer layer, creating thin rubber
sheets that change illuminance and capacitance under deformation
(Fig. 4A). These sheets were integrated into the skin of a soft robotic
worm made of three pressurized chambers, providing it with highly
stretchable deformability, dynamic coloration, and sensory feedback
from external and internal stimuli.
Growing
Recently, plants have also been considered models in bioinspired and
soft robotics. The abilities of these organisms to grow for their entire
life by incremental addition of new material have been exploited in a
new generation of robots inspired by roots (that is, plantoids) (Fig. 4B)
that can grow at the tip region of the robotic root using layer-by-layer
deposition achieved with an additive manufacturing technique similar
to fusion deposition modeling (Fig. 4C) (74).
5 of 11

SCIENCE ROBOTICS | REVIEW

Fig. 3. Examples of squeezability, resilience, and underwater propulsion. (A) Steps of locomotion under a small crevice by a soft robot based on Pneu-Net (33). (B) Demonstration
of resilience of the robot built from a silicone elastomer (61). (C) Cockroach-inspired robot passing through small crevices (69). (D) Steps of pulsed-jet propulsion with a soft deformable body
(72). [Credits (A to D): multigait soft robot, R. F. Shepherd; resilient-untethered soft robot, M. T. Tolley; vockroach-inspired soft legged robot, K. Jayaram and R. J. Full; PoseiDRONE robot, C. Laschi].

Combined bending and stiffening

The design of soft manipulators can offer revolutionary approaches
beyond the current limitations in medical sectors, such as minimally
invasive surgery. Rigid instruments can exert remarkable forces, but
they usually lack dexterity: Clashing often occurs in the control of
these instruments. A solution to overcome these limits is based on
soft actuators [flexible fluidic actuators (FFAs)], which guarantee
high dexterity together with an intrinsic capability of safely interacting with tissues and organs. At the same time, surgical manipulators
also have to guarantee the possibility of varying their stiffness, to
generate relatively high forces when needed. Technologies for
stiffening soft bodies have greatly progressed recently, as reviewed
in (32). In general, two approaches are possible: the use of antagonistic arrangement of soft actuators (so that a simultaneous activation produces an isometric stress without net deformations) and the
use of semiactive actuators with variable stiffness ability. The STIFFFLOP (75) manipulator is an example of how to match all these requirements (76). The key aspect is to be able to manipulate objects
while controlling the stiffness of selected body parts and being inherently compliant when interacting with objects. It is based on a
modular architecture: It is composed of three identical modules,
and each module is composed of three chambers used as FFA and
one central channel that lodges a granular jamming system for
stiffening the arm in the desired position. By activating the corresponding combination of actuators, omnidirectional bending, elongation, and tunable stiffening are thus obtained in the STIFF-FLOP
manipulator (Fig. 5) (77).
Self-deployment and folding
As mentioned in a previous section, some soft self-deployable structures,
inspired by the ancient Japanese technique of paper folding, have been
proposed. Many different devices based on origami structures have been
demonstrated to change their shape into another predetermined form
through external stimuli (mostly heat application), from basic building
Laschi, Mazzolai, Cianchetti, Sci. Robot. 1, eaah3690 (2016)

6 December 2016

blocks (Fig. 6A) (78) to entire robots (Fig. 6B) (79). A very recent review
paper on soft origami can be found in (80).
Adaptable grasping
The compliance of soft-bodied robots and devices has also been
exploited for its high adaptation capabilities. Although grasping has
been extensively investigated in robotics and effective grippers exist in
manufacturing, prosthetics, and many other fields (81), soft materials
can be exploited as an excellent interface when grasping tasks have to
be accomplished. If the entire body of the robot is made of soft
materials, then intrinsic safety can also be enhanced. This concept
has been used to develop a number of soft grippers based on different
technologies. We highlight two cases exemplifying two different
approaches. The first, the RBO Hand 2, starts from the five-finger
configuration and uses soft materials to exploit constraints present in
the environment to obtain robust grasping (82). The RBO Hand 2 is
built with PneuFlex (silicone pneumatic-based actuators). Because of
its deformability, the hand can exploit environmental constraints, such
as the support of the objects to grasp, and it can robustly grasp objects
of different shapes (83). The second example adopts a completely different morphology, that is, a ball-like shape, and uses the granular
jamming mechanism (described in a previous section) to build a universal gripper that can grasp objects of any shape by adapting its shape
to theirs and then changing its stiffness to hold them (84). Tendondriven approaches are very effective for obtaining adaptable grasping, even
with rigid links (85). The combination of soft structures provides further
abilities and allows the building of wearable devices. A tendon-driven approach that exploits a jointless silicone structure driven by cables in the
Exo-Glove wearable glove to restore hand motion capabilities of impaired
people has been proposed (58). Another interesting case in assistance and
rehabilitation has its basis in the different technological principles of flexible fluidic actuation (56). It consists of a completely soft glove based on
elastomeric bending actuators aligned with the hand fingers and thus can
assist grasping when activated.
6 of 11

SCIENCE ROBOTICS | REVIEW

Fig. 4. Example of highly extensible sensor and growing capability. (A) Images of the hyperelastic stretchable skin with examples of light emission (73). (B) Image
of a plantoid robot showing robotic roots with bending and growing capabilities. (C) Steps of growth in a plant rootinspired robot. By rotating the deposition head
(DH), the filament (green) passes through the nozzle and is deposited around the outer surface of the tubular body. The mature zone (MZ) of the robotic body remains
strongly anchored to the soil. L indicates the increased length after each deposition step at that specific time t (74). [Credits: highly stretchable electroluminescent skin,
R. F. Shepherd; Plantoid robot, B. Mazzolai].

to literally detach robot body parts and attach them elsewhere, resulting in the ability
to completely reconfigure and/or extend
the robot body. Currently, this has been
demonstrated using HMAs (hot-melting
adhesives) to reversibly connect/disconnect
building blocks to the robot, but in (87),
the possibility of building the entire body
with such a material by combining the
benefit of the mechanical properties of
the material and the shape-changing ability was also envisaged.
Self-healing
Thermoreversibility is also at the base of a
very new possibility that has been investigated for robots based on soft materials:
self-healing. Self-healing has been introduced as a restoring mechanism for damaged actuators (88, 89), but it could be
theoretically extended to all robot body
Fig. 5. Example of multibending combined with stiffening capabilities. STIFF-FLOP manipulator interacting with
parts. The idea has its basis in the molecwater-filled balloons: passing below and grasping (A), passing in between and grasping (B), and applying a force while
ular mobility of Diels-Alder (DA) polyretracting (C) (77). [Credits: STIFF-FLOP manipulator, M. Cianchetti].
mers, which tend to form an elastic
network at room temperature but behave
Morphing
as a viscous gel if the temperature exceeds 90C. When perforated by
Recent soft robotics research has also explored morphological change. sharp objects (thus without implying removal of material), the polyThe use of a thermoplastic material was demonstrated to enable the pos- mer demonstrates the ability to cure the macroscopic damage
sibility of hardware modifications (morphing) (86). The peculiar (through quite a long thermal treatment) and to completely restore
characteristic of the materials to pass from solid to liquid can be exploited its previous mechanical properties.
Laschi, Mazzolai, Cianchetti, Sci. Robot. 1, eaah3690 (2016)

6 December 2016

7 of 11

SCIENCE ROBOTICS | REVIEW

The abilities of soft-body robots to stretch, squeeze, and morph open
new scenarios of applications for robotics.
From different viewpoints, impacts of soft robotics will be large.
Robotics is going to change dramatically, and a radically new generation
of machines is being developed, with better performance in the real
world and greater adaptability in a variety of tasks (6). The intrinsic
multidisciplinary nature of soft robotics favors new and nonconventional scientific approaches, given that most of the well-known robotics techniques are not applicable. An example is the coupling between
soft robotics and morphological computation (21), which stands as a
CONCLUSIONS
new approach to robot design. Supported by a dynamic, engaged, riskWe have seen how the use of soft materials and variable stiffness tech- taking research community spanning from engineering to materials
nologies in robotics represents an emerging way to build new classes science, biology, mathematics and modeling, medicine, and many othof robotic systems with new abilities that are expected to interact more er disciplines, soft robotics has great potential for promoting scientific
effectively with natural, unstructured environments and with humans. and technological progress. Recent achievements in important
enabling techniques and their theoretical
frameworks are reinforcing this progress.
The current soft robotics literature numbers at almost 1000 publications, steadily
increasing from a value close to zero in
2004 (Fig. 7).
Although the advantages of being soft
are many for robots, in terms of abilities,
as outlined in this paper, being completely soft has important drawbacks, too.
Looking at living organisms, one may observe that soft animals tend to be small,
whereas larger animals typically need a
skeleton to support their own body
weight (9). Large soft animals without a
skeleton are found in water (for example,
squid and jellyfish) or underground (for
example, giant earthworms), where their
bodies are supported by the surrounding
Fig. 6. Origami robots, with the ability of folding and unfolding, changing their shape in response to external
medium. This biological evidence sugstimuli. (A) Simple cubic building blocks based on SMA that can unfold in 3 s and fold again in 2 s (78); (B) a planar sheet of
gests a similar approach in soft robotics,
paper self-folding into a complex 3D shape thanks to embedded shape memory composites (79). [Credits: self-folding
origami robot, K.-J. Cho; self-folding machines, Wyss Institute at Harvard University].
that is, to merge rigid structures with
Biodegradability
Soft materials often imply the use of polymers. Rarely does the development of robots or devices based on these materials take into consideration environmental implications. However, increasing interest in
this subject has pushed some researchers to work on biodegradable
and even edible materials (90). Applied to soft actuators, the materials
demonstrated good mechanical performance and represented a step
toward environmentally friendly robotics.

Fig. 7. Data on soft robotics literature from Scopus in July 2016. Query: (TITLE-ABS-KEY("soft robot*")OR TITLE-ABS-KEY("soft bodied robot*")OR (TITLE-ABS-KEY
("soft material*")AND TITLE-ABS-KEY(robot*))).
Laschi, Mazzolai, Cianchetti, Sci. Robot. 1, eaah3690 (2016)

6 December 2016

8 of 11

SCIENCE ROBOTICS | REVIEW

soft-matter technologies following new design rules for an integrated
approach. This will also enhance the forces that soft robots can exert
on the environment, potentially increasing their applications.
The challenge to realize autonomous soft robots definitely requires
the integration of different materials and functionalities, such as actuation, powering, and logic. To achieve the required integration, including
rigid and soft structures, a combination of advanced fabrication techniques represents a promising solution for the next generation of soft robots. Among many, such techniques include micromolding (91), soft
lithography (92), and multimaterial embedded 3D printing (93).
A greater understanding of the properties of soft materials and how
they interact with control systems and the environment is also
needed to produce desired robotic behavior in real contexts (94).
Among the open challenges of soft robotics, a complete theoretical
framework for designing morphological computation in a soft robot
is still missing, but methods have been defined for measuring the
role of a soft body in processing information. These methods are
important contributions in this sense. The method proposed in
(41) quantitatively characterizes the spatiotemporal dynamics of a
soft body through an information-theoretic approach based on
Shannon entropy.
Methods and techniques for modeling soft robots (95) for
simulation and control (96) are becoming available, and they represent
an enabling body of knowledge and techniques for further progress of
soft robotics. The challenges given by the complex nonlinear behaviors
of soft bodies can be adequately approached with learning-based control methods, in which the controllers can learn the robot embodiment through motor babbling (6).
Despite the large achievements in this field, soft robotics technologies can still be improved by learning from the biological system capabilities of morphological changes and the adaptation of the bodies
and functionality during their lifetimes by growing, or even repairing,
damaged body parts. The scientific challenges ahead for soft robotics
are further developing these lifelike abilities to change shape, stiffen,
grow, self-heal, develop, and evolve. We envisage abilities for robots to
adapt, not only their behavior but also their morphology, and technologies and techniques for task-adapted morphologies. Going beyond
soft robotics, their bodyware can change shape to adapt to physical
or task constraints. Going beyond robot control, their behavior will
develop in accordance with their soft body. Going beyond bioinspired
robotics, their morphology can be designed according to the intended
environment.
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
robotics.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/1/1/eaah3690/DC1
Movie S1. Soft robots with abilities not found in rigid robots. The compilation uses parts of
videos from (73, 74, 77).

REFERENCES AND NOTES

1. B. Webb, What does robotics offer animal behavior? Anim. Behav. 60, 545558
(2000).
2. B. Siciliano, O. Khatib, Eds. in Springer Handbook of Robotics (Springer International
Publishing, ed. 2, 2016).
3. L. Wang, F. Iida, Deformation in soft-matter robotics: A categorization and quantitative
characterization. IEEE Robot. Automat. Mag. 22, 125139 (2015).
4. H. Shen, Meet the soft, cuddly robots of the future. Nature 530, 2426 (2016).
5. D. Rus, M. T. Tolley, Design, fabrication and control of soft robots. Nature 521, 467475
(2015).
6. R. Pfeifer, M. Lungarella, F. Iida, The challenges ahead for bio-inspired soft robotics.
Commun. ACM 55, 7687 (2012).

Laschi, Mazzolai, Cianchetti, Sci. Robot. 1, eaah3690 (2016)

6 December 2016

7. E. Snell-Rood, Interdisciplinarity: Bring biologists into biomimetics. Nature 529, 277278

(2016).
8. R. Pfeifer, M. Lungarella, F. Iida, Self-organization, embodiment, and biologically inspired
robotics. Science 318, 10881093 (2007).
9. S. Kim, C. Laschi, B. Trimmer, Soft robotics: A bioinspired evolution in robotics. Trends
Biotechnol. 31, 287294 (2013).
10. A. Albu-Schaffer, M. Fischer, G. Schreiber, F. Schoeppe, G. Hirzinger, Soft robotics: What
Cartesian stiffness can obtain with passively compliant, uncoupled joints?, in
Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and
Systems, Sendai, Japan, 28 September to 2 October 2004 [Institute of Electrical &
Electronics Engineers (IEEE), 2004], pp. 32953301.
11. A. Albu-Schffer, O. Eiberger, M. Grebenstein, S. Haddadin, C. Ott, T. Wimbck, S. Wolf,
G. Hirzinger, Soft robotics. IEEE Robot. Automat. Mag. 15, 2030 (2008).
12. D. Trivedi, C. D. Rahn, W. M. Kier, I. D. Walker, Soft robotics: Biological inspiration, state of
the art, and future research. Appl. Bionics Biomech. 5, 99117 (2008).
13. D. Trivedi, A. Lotfi, C. D. Rahn, Geometrically exact models for soft robotic manipulators.
IEEE Trans. Robot. 24, 773780 (2008).
14. G. Robinson, J. B. C. Davies, Continuum robotsA state of the art, in Proceedings
of the 1999 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Detroit, MI, 10
to 15 May 1999 (IEEE, 1999), pp. 28492854.
15. C. Laschi, M. Cianchetti, Soft robotics: New perspectives for robot bodyware and control.
Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2 3 (2014).
16. RoboSoft is a Coordination Action on Soft Robotics funded by the European Commission.
17. M. Cianchetti, M. Calisti, L. Margheri, M. Kuba, C. Laschi, Bioinspired locomotion and
grasping in water: The soft eight-arm OCTOPUS robot. Bioinspir. Biomim. 10, 035003 (2015).
18. R. Baldur, W. Blach, Inflatable Manipulator (Society of Manufacturing Engineers, 1985).
19. K. Suzumori, S. Iikura, H. Tanaka, Development of flexible microactuator and its
applications to robotic mechanisms, in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference
on Robotics and Automation, Sacramento, CA, 9 to 11 April 1991 (IEEE, 1991),
pp. 16221627.
20. R. Pfeifer, J. C. Bongard, How the Body Shapes the Way We Think: A New View of
Intelligence (MIT Press, 2007).
21. C. Laschi, B. Mazzolai, Lessons from nature: The symbiosis of morphological
computation and soft robotics. IEEE Robot. Automat. Mag. 23, 107114 (2016).
22. M. D. Grissom, V. Chitrakaran, D. Dienno, M. Csencsits, M. Pritts, B. Jones, W. McMahan,
D. Dawson, C. D. Rahn, I. D. Walker, Design and experimental testing of the OctArm
soft robot manipulator. Proc. SPIE 6230, 10.1117/12.665321 (2006).
23. Y. Bar-Cohen, Electroactive polymers as artificial muscles: Capabilities, potentials and
challenges, in Handbook on Biomimetics, Y. Osada, Ed. (NTS Inc., 2000), pp. 188196.
24. F. Daerden, D. Lefeber, Pneumatic artificial muscles: Actuators for robotics and
automation. Eur. J. Mech. Environ. Eng. 47, 1021 (2002).
25. B. Trimmer, A. Takesian, B. Sweet, C. B. Rogers, D. C. Hake, D. J. Rogers, Caterpillar
locomotion: A new model for soft-bodied climbing and burrowing robots, in
Proceedings of the 2006 7th International Symposium on Technology and the Mine
Problem, Monterey, CA, 2 to 5 May 2006 (Naval Postgraduate School, 2006).
26. M. Cianchetti, Fundamentals on the use of shape memory alloys in soft robotics, in
Interdisciplinary Mechatronics: Engineering Science and Research Development,
M. K. Habib, J. Paulo Davim, Eds. (Wiley-ISTE, 2013), pp. 227254.
27. S. Kim, E. Hawkes, K. Cho, M. Joldaz, J. Foleyz, R. Wood, Micro artificial muscle fiber using
NiTi spring for soft robotics, in Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference
on Intelligent Robots and Systems, St. Louis, MO, 10 to 15 October 2009 (IEEE, 2009)
pp. 22282234.
28. S. Seok, C. Onal, R. Wood, D. Rus, S. Kim, Peristaltic locomotion with antagonistic
actuators in soft robotics, in Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Conference
on Robotics and Automation, Anchorage, AK, 3 to 8 May 2010 (IEEE, 2010),
pp. 12281233.
29. T. Kaufhold, V. Bohm, K. Zimmermann, Design of a miniaturized locomotion system with
variable mechanical compliance based on amoeboid movement, in Proceedings of the
IEEE RAS EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, Rome,
Italy, 24 to 27 June 2012 (IEEE, 2012) pp. 10601065.
30. E. Steltz, A. Mozeika, N. Rodenberg, E. Brown, H. M. Jaeger, JSEL: Jamming Skin
Enabled Locomotion, in Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on
Intelligent Robots and Systems, St. Louis, MO, 11 to 15 October 2009 (IEEE, 2009)
pp. 56725677.
31. J. R. Amend, E. Brown, N. Rodenberg, H. M. Jaeger, H. Lipson, A positive pressure
universal gripper based on the jamming of granular material. IEEE Trans. Robot. 28, 341350
(2012).
32. M. Manti, V. Cacucciolo, M. Cianchetti, Stiffening in soft robotics: A review of the state of
the art. IEEE Robot. Automat. Mag. 23, 93106 (2016).
33. R. F. Shepherd, F. Ilievski, W. Choi, S. A. Morin, A. A. Stokes, A. D. Mazzeo, X. Chen,
M. Wang, G. M. Whitesides, Multigait soft robot. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108,
2040020403 (2011).

9 of 11

SCIENCE ROBOTICS | REVIEW

34. C. Laschi, B. Mazzolai, V. Mattoli, M. Cianchetti, P. Dario, Design of a biomimetic robotic
octopus arm. Bioinspir. Biomim. 4, 015006 (2009).
35. M. Cianchetti, V. Mattoli, B. Mazzolai, C. Laschi, P. Dario, A new design methodology of
electrostrictive actuators for bio-inspired robotics. Sens. Actuators B 142, 288297
(2009).
36. C. Laschi, M. Cianchetti, B. Mazzolai, L. Margheri, M. Follador, P. Dario, Soft robot arm
inspired by the octopus. Adv. Robotics 26, 709727 (2012).
37. K. K. Smith, W. M. Kier, Trunks, tongues, and tentacles: Moving with skeletons of muscle.
Am. Sci. 77, 2835 (1989).
38. F. Renda, M. Cianchetti, M. Giorelli, A. Arienti, C. Laschi, A 3D steady-state model of a
tendon-driven continuum soft manipulator inspired by the octopus arm. Bioinspir.
Biomim. 7, pp. 50335039 (2012).
39. M. Giorelli, F. Renda, G. Ferri, C. Laschi, A feed-forward neural network learning
the inverse kinetics of a soft cable-driven manipulator moving in three-dimensional
space, in Proceedings on the 2013 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent
Robots and Systems, Tokyo, Japan, 3 to 7 November 2013 (IEEE, 2013), pp. 50335039.
40. A. Kazakidi, V. Vavourakis, N. Pateromichelakis, J. A. Ekaterinaris, D. P. Tsakiris,
Hydrodynamic analysis of octopus-like robotic arms, in Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE
Conference on Robotics and Automation, St. Paul, MN, 14 to 18 May 2012 (IEEE, 2012)
pp. 52905300.
41. K. Nakajima, H. Hauser, R. Kang, E. Guglielmino, D. G. Caldwell, R. Pfeifer, A soft body
as a reservoir: Case studies in a dynamic model of octopus-inspired soft robotic
arm. Front. Comput. Neurosci. 7, 5295300 (2013).
42. J. Hou, R. H. C. Bonser, G. Jeronimidis, Design of a biomimetic skin for an octopusinspired robot part I: Characterising octopus skin. J. Bionic Eng. 8, 288296 (2011).
43. F. Tramacere, L. Beccai, E. Sinibaldi, C. Laschi, B. Mazzolai, Adhesion mechanisms
inspired by octopus suckers. Procedia Comput. Sci. 7, 192193 (2011).
44. M. Follador, F. Tramacere, B. Mazzolai, Dielectric elastomer actuators for octopus
inspired suction cups. Bioinspir. Biomim. 9, 046002 (2014).
45. M. Calisti, M. Giorelli, G. Levy, B. Mazzolai, B. Hochner, C. Laschi, P. Dario, An
octopus-bioinspired solution to movement and manipulation for soft robots. Bioinspir.
Biomim. 6, 036002 (2011).
46. F. Giorgio-Serchi, A. Arienti, C. Laschi, Biomimetic vortex propulsion: Toward the new
paradigm of soft unmanned underwater vehicles. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 18,
484493 (2013).
47. D. B. Camarillo, C. R. Carlson, J. K. Salisbury, Configuration tracking for continuum
manipulators with coupled tendon drive. IEEE Trans. Robot. 25, 798808 (2009).
48. G. S. Chirikjian, J. W. Burdick, A modal approach to hyper-redundant manipulator
kinematics. IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 10, 343354 (1994).
49. D.-H. Kim, J. A. Rogers, Stretchable electronics: Materials strategies and devices. Adv.
Mater. 20, 48874892 (2008).
50. M. K. Dobrzynski, R. Pericet-Camara, D. Floreano, Contactless deflection sensor
for soft robots, in Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on
Intelligent Robots and Systems, San Francisco, CA, 25 to 30 September (IEEE, 2011)
pp. 19131918.
51. J. K. Paik, R. K. Kramer, R. J. Wood, Stretchable circuits and sensors for robotic
origami, in Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent
Robots and Systems, San Francisco, CA, 25 to 30 September 2011 (IEEE, 2011)
pp. 414420.
52. S. Voisembert, A. Riwan, N. Mechbal, Numerical evaluation of a new robotic
manipulator based on inflatable joints, in Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International
Conference on Automation Science and Engineering, Seoul, 20 to 24 August 2012
(Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 2012), pp. 544549.
53. J. Hiller, H. Lipson, Automatic design and manufacture of soft robots. IEEE Trans Robot.
28, 457466 (2012).
54. F. Corucci, N. Cheney, H. Lipson, C. Laschi, J. Bongard, Material properties affect
evolutions ability to exploit morphological computation in growing soft-bodied
creatures, in Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on the Synthesis and
Simulation of Living SystemsALIFE XV, Cancun, Mexico, 4 to 8 July 2016 (MIT Press,
2016).
55. J. Burgner-Kahrs, D. C. Rucker, H. Choset, Continuum robots for medical applications: A
survey. IEEE Trans. Robot. 31, 12611280 (2015).
56. P. Polygerinos, Z. Wang, K. C. Galloway, R. J. Wood, C. J. Walsh, Soft robotic glove for combined
assistance and at-home rehabilitation. Robot. Auton. Syst. 73, 135143 (2015).
57. E. C. Goldfield, Y.-L. Park, B.-R. Chen, W.-H. Hsu, D. Young, M. Wehner,
D. G. Kelty-Stephen, L. Stirling, M. Weinberg, D. Newman, R. Nagpal, E. Saltzman,
K. G. Holt, C. Walsh, R. J. Wood, Bio-inspired design of soft robotic assistive devices: The
interface of physics, biology, and behavior. Ecol. Psychol. 24, 300327 (2012).
58. H. In, B. B. Kang, M. Sin, K. J. Cho, Exo-glove: A wearable robot for the hand with a soft
tendon routing system. IEEE Robot. Automat. Mag. 22, 97105 (2015).
59. Y. Ansari, E. Falotico, Y. Mollard, B. Busch, M. Cianchetti, C. Laschi, A multi-agent
reinforcement learning approach for inverse kinematics of high dimensional

Laschi, Mazzolai, Cianchetti, Sci. Robot. 1, eaah3690 (2016)

6 December 2016

60.

61.
62.

63.

64.
65.

66.
67.
68.
69.
70.

71.

72.
73.

74.
75.
76.

77.
78.

79.
80.
81.
82.

83.
84.

85.
86.

manipulators with precision positioning, in Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Conference on

Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, Singapore, 26 to 29 June 2016 (IEEE, 2016),
pp. 457463.
C. Jianfei, W. Xingsong, Conception of a tendon-sheath and pneumatic system driven soft
rescue robot, in Robot Intelligence Technology and Applications 3: Results from the 3rd
International Conference on Robot Intelligence Technology and Applications, J.-H. Kim,
W. Yang, J. Jo, P. Sincak, H. Myung, Eds. (Springer International Publishing, 2015).
M. T. Tolley, R. F. Shepherd, B. Mosadegh, K. C. Galloway, M. Wehner, M. Karpelson,
R. J. Wood, G. M. Whitesides, A resilient, untethered soft robot. Soft Robot. 1, 213223 (2014).
N. W. Bartlett, M. T. Tolley, J. T. B. Overvelde, J. C. Weaver, B. Mosadegh, K. Bertoldi,
G. M. Whitesides, R. J. Wood, A 3D-printed, functionally graded soft robot powered by
combustion. Science 349, 161165 (2015).
R. F. Shepherd, A. A. Stokes, J. Freake, J. Barber, P. W. Snyder, A. D. Mazzeo,
L. Cademartiri, S. A. Morin, G. M. Whitesides, Using explosions to power a soft robot.
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 52, 28922896 (2013).
H.-T. Lin, G. G. Leisk, B. Trimmer, GoQBot: A caterpillar-inspired soft-bodied rolling robot.
Bioinspir. Biomim. 6, 026007 (2011).
S. Seok, C. D. Onal, K.-J. Cho, R. J. Wood, D. Rus, S. Kim, Meshworm: A peristaltic soft
robot with antagonistic nickel titanium coil actuators. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 18,
14851497 (2013).
A. S. Boxerbaum, K. M. Shaw, H. J. Chiel, R. D. Quinn, Continuous wave peristaltic motion
in a robot. Int. J. Robot. Res. 31, 302318 (2012).
S. Kim, M. Spenko, S. Trujillo, B. Heyneman, D. Santos, M. Cutkosky, Smooth vertical
surface climbing with directional adhesion. IEEE Trans. Robot. 24, 6574 (2008).
M. R. Cutkosky, Climbing with adhesion: From bioinspiration to biounderstanding.
Interface Focus 5, 20150015 (2015).
K. Jayaram, R. J. Full, Cockroaches traverse crevices, crawl rapidly in confined
spaces, and inspire a soft, legged robot. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 113, 640645 (2016).
M. Follador, M. Cianchetti, C. Laschi, Development of the functional unit of a completely
soft octopus-like robotic arm, in Proceedings of the IEEE RAS/EMBS International
Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, Rome, Italy, 24 to 27 June 2012
(IEEE, 2012) pp. 640645.
M. Calisti, F. Corucci, A. Arienti, C. Laschi, Dynamics of underwater legged
locomotion: Modeling and experiments on an octopus-inspired robot. Bioinspir.
Biomim. 10, 046012 (2015).
F. Renda, F. Giorgio-Serchi, F. Boyer, C. Laschi, Modelling cephalopod-inspired pulsed-jet
locomotion for underwater soft robots. Bioinspir. Biomim. 10, 055005 (2015).
C. Larson, B. Peele, S. Li, S. Robinson, M. Totaro, L. Beccai, B. Mazzolai, R. Shepherd,
Highly stretchable electroluminescent skin for optical signaling and tactile sensing.
Science 351, 10711074 (2016).
A. Sadeghi, A. Tonazzini, L. Popova, B. Mazzolai, A novel growing device inspired by
plant root soil penetration behaviors. PLOS ONE 9, e90139 (2014).
STIFF-FLOP: STIFFness controllable Flexible and Learn-able Manipulator for surgical
OPerations.
M. Cianchetti, T. Ranzani, G. Gerboni, T. Nanayakkara, K. Althoefer, P. Dasgupta,
A. Menciassi, Soft robotics technologies to address shortcomings in todays minimally
invasive surgery: The STIFF-FLOP approach. Soft Robot. 1, 122131 (2014).
T. Ranzani, G. Gerboni, M. Cianchetti, A. Menciassi, A bioinspired soft manipulator for
minimally invasive surgery, Bioinspir. Biomim. 10, 035008 (2015).
S.-R. Kim, D.-Y. Lee, J.-S. Koh, K.-J. Cho, Fast, compact, and lightweight shape-shifting
system composed of distributed self-folding origami modules, in Proceedings of the IEEE
International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Stockholm, Sweden, 16 to 21 May
2016 (IEEE, 2016) pp. 49694974.
S. Felton, M. Tolley, E. Demaine, D. Rus, R. J. Wood, A method for building self-folding
machines. Science 345, 644646 (2014).
C. M. Wheeler, M. L. Culpepper, Soft origami: Classification, constraint, and actuation of
highly compliant origami structures. J. Mech. Robot. 8, 051012 (2016).
C. Melchiorri, M. Kaneko, Robot hands, in Springer Handbook of Robotics (SpringerVerlag, 2008), pp 345360.
C. Eppner, R. Deimel, J. lvarez-Ruiz, M. Maertens, O. Brock, Exploitation of
environmental constraints in human and robotic grasping. Int. J. Robot. Res. 34,
10211038 (2015).
R. Deimel, O. Brock, A novel type of compliant and underactuated robotic hand for
dexterous grasping. Int. J. Robot. Res. 35, 161185 (2016).
J. Amend Jr., E. Brown, N. Rodenberg, H. Jaeger, H. M. Lipson, A positive pressure
universal gripper based on the jamming of granular material. IEEE Trans. Robot. 28,
341350 (2012).
C. Cipriani, M. Controzzi, M. C. Carrozza, Objectives, criteria and methods for the design
of the SmartHand transradial prosthesis. Robotica 28, 919927 (2010).
L. Wang, F. Iida, Towards soft self-reconfigurable robots, in Proceedings of the IEEE
RAS/EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics,
Rome, Italy, 24 to 27 June 2012 (IEEE, 2012), pp. 593598.

10 of 11

SCIENCE ROBOTICS | REVIEW

87. L. Brodbeck, F. Iida, An extendible reconfigurable robot based on hot melt adhesives.
Auton. Robot. 39, 87100 (2015).
88. S. Terryn, G. Mathijssen, J. Brancart, D. Lefeber, G. V. Assche, B. Vanderborght,
Development of a self-healing soft pneumatic actuator: A first concept. Bioinspir.
Biomim. 10, 046007 (2015).
89. R. F. Shepherd, A. A. Stokes, R. M. D. Nunes, G. M. Whitesides, Soft machines that are
resistant to puncture and that self seal. Adv. Mater. 25, 67096713 (2013).
90. L. D. Chambers, J. Winfield, I. Ieropoulos, J. Rossiter, Biodegradable and edible gelatine
actuators for use as artificial muscles. Proc. SPIE 9056, 90560B (2014).
91. M. Heckele, W. K. J. Schomburg, Review on micro molding of thermoplastic polymers.
J. Micromech. Microeng. 14, R1R14 (2004).
92. D. Qin, Y. Xia, G. M. Whitesides, Soft lithography for micro- and nanoscale patterning.
Nat. Protoc. 5, 491502 (2010).
93. W. Wu, A. DeConinck, J. A. Lewis, Omnidirectional printing of 3D microvascular
networks. Adv. Mater. 23, H178H183 (2011).
94. C. Paul, Morphological computation: A basis for the analysis of morphology and control
requirements. Robot. Auton. Syst. 54, 619630 (2006).
95. F. Renda, M. Giorelli, M. Calisti, M. Cianchetti, C. Laschi, Dynamic model of a
multibending soft robot arm driven by cables, IEEE Trans. Robot. 30, 11091122
(2014).
96. F. Largilliere, V. Verona, E. Coevoet, M. Sanz-Lopez, J. Dequidt, C. Duriez, Real-time
control of soft-robots using asynchronous finite element modeling, in Proceedings of
the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Stockholm, Sweden,
16 to 21 May 2016 (IEEE, 2016) pp. 25502555.
97. S. Kim, J. E. Clark, M. R. Cutkosky, iSprawl: Design and tuning for high-speed
autonomous open-loop running. Int. J. Robot. Res. 25, 903912 (2006).
98. K. C. Galloway, J. E. Clark, M. Yim, D. E. Koditschek, Experimental investigations into
the role of passive variable compliant legs for dynamic robotic locomotion,

Laschi, Mazzolai, Cianchetti, Sci. Robot. 1, eaah3690 (2016)

6 December 2016

99.
100.
101.

102.

103.
104.

International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2011 IEEE International,

Shanghai, China, 9 to 13 May 2011 (IEEE, 2011) pp. 12431249.
www.softroboticsinc.com/
A. D. Marchese, C. D. Onal, D. Rus, Autonomous soft robotic fish capable of escape
maneuvers using fluidic elastomer actuators, Soft Robot. 1, 7587 (2014).
A. Arienti, M. Calisti, F. Giorgio Serchi, C. Laschi, PoseiDRONE: Design of a soft-bodied
ROV with crawling, swimming and manipulation ability, in Proceedings of the MTS/IEEE
OCEANS Conference, San Diego, CA, 21 to 27 September 2013 (IEEE, 2013) pp. 17.
J. K. Paik, R. K. Kramer, R. J. Wood, Stretchable circuits and sensors for robotic origami,
in Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and
Systems, San Francisco, CA, 25 to 30 September 2011 (IEEE, 2011), pp. 414420.
T. Umedachi, V. Vikas, B. A. Trimmer, Softworms: The design and control of nonpneumatic, 3D-printed, deformable robots. Bioinspir. Biomim. 11, 025001 (2016).
M. Wehner, R. L. Truby, D. J. Fitzgerald, B. Mosadegh, G. M. Whitesides, J. A. Lewis,
R. J. Wood, An integrated design and fabrication strategy for entirely soft, autonomous
robots. Nature 536, 451455 (2016).

Acknowledgments
Funding: This work was supported by the European Commission through the RoboSoft
Coordination Action (grant number 619319) and the I-Support project (grant number 643666).
Submitted 4 August 2016
Accepted 4 October 2016
Published 6 December 2016
10.1126/scirobotics.aah3690
Citation: C. Laschi, B. Mazzolai, M. Cianchetti, Soft robotics: Technologies and systems pushing
the boundaries of robot abilities. Sci. Robot. 1, eaah3690 (2016).

11 of 11