Page 102 - Read Online
P. 102

Kulkarni et al. Soft Sci. 2025, 5, 12  https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/ss.2023.51   Page 23 of 35

                                                                  [287]
                                  [286]
               rehabilitation exosuits , and search and rescue operations . As commercial applications increase, their
               designers must also consider the end users to expand their reach and accessibility for low-cost, durable, and
               safe devices .
                         [288]
               In 2012, as soft robotics was gaining popularity , Empire Robotics was founded to commercialize a particle
                                                       [12]
               jamming gripper. By 2016, the company closed but offered lessons learned from its commercialization
               efforts . The team initially explored markets including space exploration, prosthetics, bottle capping, and
                     [289]
               toys, but found that industrial applications had the fewest regulatory hurdles and largest market
               opportunity . While n = 1,000 cycles to failure are acceptable for an academic demonstration, Empire
                         [289]
               Robotics estimated that their grippers would need replacement every 70 days in industrial settings. Even
               with a successful product, competing design criteria (durability, size, shape, pneumatics, granularity)
               presented challenges for the commercial effort . Despite this, the market for soft robot technologies
                                                         [289]
               continues to grow. In 2019, the soft robotics market was estimated to reach almost $5 billion by 2025 .
                                                                                                      [290]
               Soft Robotics Inc. provides PneuNet (pneumatic network)-based grippers for industrial packaging and had
               revenue of $26.4 million in 2019 and continues to expand its offerings and use globally . Future
                                                                                                 [16]
               considerations for the commercialization of soft robots include their expansion into other applications
               including biomedical and extreme environment exploration. The soft material structure makes soft robots
                                                              [291]
               safe for human interaction, including in medical devices . However, the fabrication and operation of these
                                                                                      [291]
               robots must also avoid actuator dysfunction which might result in safety concerns . Using low-cost soft
               materials to build these systems can increase the accessibility of soft robots for many applications.

               One arena in which soft robots are being tested for their ease of use and durability is in classrooms.
               Researchers at academic institutions have developed courses that engage undergraduate and graduate
               students in soft robot design and ideation [292,293] . The potential for low-cost prototyping materials, design-
               based development, and interdisciplinarity in the field has also led to the use of soft robots in K-12
               education . Education can be a particularly complex environment because designs must be robust and
                       [294]
               easy to use to ensure positive experiences in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) for
                      [295]
               children . Designers here must focus on simplified designs  and low cost to increase accessibility .
                                                                    [296]
                                                                                                      [297]
                                                                                        [298]
               Additionally, progress toward safe material composition and fabrication methods  of soft robots for
               educational outreach purposes would help reduce safety risks. For instance, edible soft robotic candy
               actuators can be used for STEM outreach to provide students with a safe and enjoyable hands-on experience
               in building soft robots . Designing soft actuators for engineering-based learning activities for students
                                   [299]
               allows them to build and interact with these actuators safely as they learn about and consider becoming the
               next generation of innovators contributing to this rapidly evolving field.

               CONCLUSION AND OUTLOOK
               The soft robotic actuation mechanisms, sensors, and control systems that we have reviewed have benefits
               when compared to traditional robots for applications in extreme environments including within the human
               body, ocean exploration, space exploration, search and rescue sites, and confined spaces. We can identify
               areas where soft robots provide some advantages compared to rigid devices for use in these harsh
               environments. The body is a challenging environment where compliance matching of the device to
               biological matter such as human skin and tissue is important for comfortable human contact to prevent
               injuries. These requirements make biocompatible and compliant soft devices beneficial for use in and on the
               human body compared to rigid devices. Harsh marine and space environments benefit from having devices
               that are lightweight and thermally insulated to meet the weight criterion and handle extreme temperatures
               to function in their respective environments. Confined spaces and rough unpredictable terrains can be
               navigated with soft devices with impact-bearing capabilities and deformability compared to rigid robots.
   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107