feature article

Girls in Emergency Medicine.

soft robotics as
emerging technologies:

preparing students for future work throughsoft robot design experiences

I

Students prepared with strategies for learning now will be able to apply thesame strategies when faced with new situations in the future.

n our field of technology and engineering education, we are limited by our inability to predict what
is coming; as the saying goes, we are preparing ourstudents for jobs that don’t even exist yet. Two adaptive approaches can help prepare students for thisuncertainty: teaching broad skills that can be applied in
new situations and exposing students to recent technological developments that hint at the future. Soft robotics is an
emerging technology with advantages to traditional robotics
in some circumstances. In this article, we describe several
emergent applications of soft robotics and how they alignwith the Standards for Technological Literacy (STL) domainsof technology. We also share an overview of our approach to
implementing a soft robotics design and fabrication experience focused on integrating design and inquiry skills. These
resources may be used by technology and engineering
8 technology and engineering teacher March 2020

teachers to grow student confidence for emerging engineering careers.

Preparing Students for the Future
Integrating 21st century skills development—problem solving, creativity,and communication, among others—in our classrooms is one way to prepare students for an uncertain careerlandscape. Learning these types ofskills “allows the individual to transfer
what was learned to solve newproblems” (Pellegrino & Hilton, 2012,p. 6). Open-ended and design-basedteaching are effective pedagogies

byAndrew
Jackson,NathanMentzer, andRebecca
KramerBottiglio

soft robotics as emerging technologies: preparing students for future work through soft robot design experiences
for fostering these skills: they support critical thinking, megacognition, and collaborative learning, allow students to draw on
authentic information sources to make decisions, and “highlightthe process of thinking” (Pellegrino & Hilton, 2012, p. 10), which
is transferrable to future situations. They also engage students inquestioning and self-directed learning. Voogt and Roblin (2010, p.
13) likened these competencies to “learning-to-learn” competencies, noting that pedagogical approaches for 21st century skills
can include student involvement in pacing and assessment. In
this way, students prepared with strategies for learning now will
be able to apply the same strategies when faced with new situations in the future. Though the skills are not new, they are called
upon at an increasing rate and in broadening types of careers.
As career options broaden, especially in technology and engineering, we need to be aware of and communicate the natureof these fields to our students. Looking at recent technologicaldevelopments is critical:
Looking forward to further changes in science and technology, perhaps revolutionary changes, we are limited by our
inability to see the future… Turning to reality, though, thebest we can do is look at recent and emergent advances…toprovide a possible template of the changes engineering willneed to contend with [in the future]. (National Academy ofEngineering, 2004, pp. 9-10).
Showing these new innovations to students, letting them explore
the advantages of these technologies and learn their intricacies
in a structured environment, and having students try the technology for themselves are all important steps in growing understanding of the core ideas. In order to develop further technological solutions, the ideas of these recent solutions will need to beleveraged and improved; “industry requires a workforce that isequally nimble at adapting to changing conditions so they canutilize available technologies and generate innovations of theirown” (Brophy, Klein, Portsmore, & Rogers, 2008, p. 369).
Trends of student interest in STEM decline during secondary
school: about 28% of students begin with STEM interest, about
half of those lose interest, yet fewer students experience a gain
in interest, so there is a failure to offset these losses (Munce &Fraser, 2013). Therefore, we need ways to recapture, even grow,

Figure 1. Search interest of "soft robotics" by year. Obtained from Google
Trends (www.google.com/trends). The y axis represents relative interestfor the search during the period of time.

student interest. Ensuring that our teaching strategies include
21st century skills and cutting-edge technology designed to meetsocietal challenges may be one such way.

Soft Robotics: Advantages and Applications
Soft robotics is one example of an emerging technology withnovel applications in areas where traditional robotics may
struggle. Soft robotics has direct societal impacts and tangible
outcomes, such as safety at the material level and appropriateness or direct human interaction, that we might explore in ourclassrooms. Soft robotics is of growing interest to the engineering community, media, and the public, as indicated by risinginterest in the search topic (Figure 1). Soft robots are controllable
systems made from soft, flexible materials that are designed toperform a task. Soft components of these systems include actuators and sensors (for movement and feedback, respectively),
which are often integrated into one body. Power and pneumatic
control may even be connected internally, though that is notoften the case for testing.
In the design phase of a robotics project, a decision might bemade to pursue soft robot use, based on the affordances of soft
robot systems (Table 1). There is inherently a tradeoff: soft robots
are less forceful and less accurate; however, their compliancein new environments and delicate interaction with objects may
be necessary for the success of the project. Wang, Chen, andTable 1. Comparison of soft robot and traditional rigid robot characteristics.
Soft Robot Design

Traditional Rigid Robot Design

Made of soft, flexible, stretchable materials(e.g., fabric, rubber, or foam)

Made of rigid materials(e.g., plastics, wood, or metal)

Naturally compliant to the environment

Compliant via control systems

Safe for human-machine interaction

Unsafe for human-machine interaction

Highly biologically inspired systems

Slightly biologically inspired systems

Low force and accuracy

High force and accuracy
March 2020 technology and engineering teacher 9soft robotics as emerging technologies: preparing students for future work through soft robot design experiences
Soft Robot Heart Sleeve Vignette

Soft Wheel Robot Vignette

Roche, et al. (2017) designed a soft robot sleeve with layers
to mimic the function of the heart. The device could be used
to help medical patients with heart failure. Compared to traditional assistive devices, it does not contact blood, meaning
it is simpler and less expensive.
Design: pneumatic artificial muscles
Domain: medical technology
Learn More: www.wired.com/2017/01/robots-coming-heart/
Image from Roche, E.T., Horvath, M.A., Wamala, I., Alazmani,A., Song, S.-E., Whyte, W., . . . Walsh, C.J. (2017). Soft robotic
sleeve supports heart function. Science Translational Medicine, 9(373). doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf3925. Reprinted withpermission from AAAS.

Farias, Nieminen, Strock, Kress-Gazit, and Shepherd (2015)
won the Soft Robotics Toolkit design competition with theiridea for a self-contained soft robot that could drive andturn. Air channels along the side of the robot would inflate,
propelling the robot forward, then deflate to allow it to keep
rolling.
Design: cast silicone with air channels
Domain: transportation technology
Learn More: https://softroboticstoolkit.com/soft-wheelrobot
Image from Farias, O., Jr., Nieminen, N., Strock, C., Kress-Gazit, H., & Shepherd, R. (2015). Soft wheel robot, submission
from Cornell University. Retrieved from Soft Robotics Toolkit
Projects website (above). Reprinted with permission fromSoft Robotics Toolkit.

Yi (2015, pp. 93-94) summarized three main applications of soft
robots that are intrinsic to their material properties. First, handling deformable, fragile, or changing objects. Because soft robot
materials are compliant relative to the environments they are in,they are able to conform to and grasp a variety of objects, evenof different shapes. Second, resemblance to natural systems,
namely biomimicry. Numerous soft robot designs have drawn
from biological inspiration for fabrication including the octopus,
jellyfish, and caterpillars. And third, human-centered applications
such as wearables or medical devices. Examples of soft robots
intended for interaction include a glove for hand rehabilitation
and a device to assist with heart rhythm.
These advantages of soft robotics are being leveraged in avariety of ways, including the applications previously mentioned.
Within the framework of seven technology areas for K-12 study
identified in STL (ITEEA, 2007), we identify prototype examplesof the use of soft robotics to address a number of problems,
described in these vignettes. There are many more applications
being investigated, and these have been chosen on the basisof their direct connection to the technology areas, clarity inmechanisms for construction, and accessibility of resources forfurther investigation. We share the design need and affordancesof soft robotics in each context, the type of soft robot construction, the STL domain, and a website to begin research. Throughfurther investigation, technology and engineering teachers canbuild understanding of these applications and incorporate theseas technological examples or design challenges in their own
classrooms.
10 technology and engineering teacher March 2020

Soft Acoustic Tile Vignette

Decker (2015) described soft robot research to dynamically
respond to and minimize sound. In its deactivated state therobot is flat; in its activated state it expands to a rough surface to affect sound reflection.
Design: pneumatic actuators
Domain: construction technology
Learn More: www.architectmagazine.com/technology/qa-material-dynamics-lab-director-martina-decker-on-theintersection-of-design-and-science_o
Image of soft acoustic tile test environment (deactivated andactivated system) courtesy of Material Dynamics Lab at the
New Jersey Institute of Technology, Ryan Berg, Paulo Guerreiro, and Jesus Vasquez.
In addition to the growing body of research related to soft robotics, there is a growing community designed to share insights,
including for educators. Teachers are encouraged to look formore information on the projects in these vignettes and others. A
useful repository is the Soft Robotics Toolkit, http://softroboticstoolkit.com/, which contains information on design, fabrication,and testing soft robot components. The design of soft robots

soft robotics as emerging technologies: preparing students for future work through soft robot design experiences
Soft Robotic Airfoil Design Vignette

Soft Robot Gripper by Soft Robotics, Inc. Vignette

Xie, et al. (2015) demonstrated using soft actuators tochange lift and drag of an airfoil by changing its shape. The
soft, morphable airfoils are lighter and simpler than rigid
mechanisms to achieve the same shapes.
Design: pneumatic actuators
Domain: transportation technology
Learn More: http://mae.rutgers.edu/elastomeric-actuatorsairfoils-aerodynamic-control-lift-and-dragImage from Xie, J., McGovern, J. B., Patel, R., Kim, W., Dutt,S., & Mazzeo, A. D. (2015). Elastomeric actuators on airfoils
for aerodynamic control of lift and drag. Advanced Engineering Materials, 17(7), 951-960. doi: 10.1002/adem.201500036.
© 2015 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.
Reprinted with permission.

Soft Robotics Inc. has created a commercial system thatuses pneumatically actuated grippers to handle a variety ofobjects, especially delicate objects like food. The system canalso adapt to objects of different shapes and sizes.
Design: pneumatic actuators
Domain: agricultural and biotechnology, manufacturing
technology
Learn More: www.softroboticsinc.com
Image from Soft Robotics, Inc. Reprinted with permission.
Robojelly Vignette

Soft Robotic Glove Vignette

Polygerinos, Wang, Galloway, Wood, and Walsh (2015) havebeen developing a soft robotic glove to assist in hand rehabilitation. Because the materials are more compliant thanrigid robotic systems, it is safer, less expensive, and more
comfortable and customizable for users.
Design: fiber-reinforced actuators
Domain: medical technology
Learn More: https://wyss.harvard.edu/technology/softrobotic-glove/
Image of soft robotic glove from Wyss Institute at Harvard
University and Harvard Biodesign, http://wyss.harvard.edu.
Reprinted with permission.
includes the application of scientific principles in pneumatics,
materials, biology, and other disciplines. It also necessarily includes problem solving and reflection on the process, as we describe in the curriculum experience shared next. Exploring thesesoft robot applications ourselves as technology and engineering

Villanueva, Smith, and Priya (2011) created a bioinspired soft
robot jellyfish for underwater movement. The design was
based on anatomy of several jellyfish species and used 3D
printing and silicone for construction.
Design: shape memory alloy wires
Domain: agricultural and biotechnology
Learn More: www.fastcompany.com/1679544/robojelly-arobotic-jellyfish-to-monitor-the-oceans
educators is a step toward incorporating soft robot design in ourown classrooms and unfolding these 21st century skills throughexperience.

Implementing Soft Robots in High School
DesignIn an effort to increase student interest in engineering and expose students to novel engineering contexts, we have developed
and tested a soft robot design experience for high school classes.
In contrast to traditional robotics systems, with which students
are likely familiar, soft robots are new and unfamiliar. Changing
the materials for construction may encourage participation fromall students in exploring this new context. The experience hascome from a four-year research partnership between Purdue
March 2020 technology and engineering teacher 11

soft robotics as emerging technologies: preparing students for future work through soft robot design experiences
University, Yale University, and the International Technology andEngineering Educators Association (ITEEA), with support fromthe National Science Foundation. The research project was situated in the 9th grade Foundations of Technology course as a twoweek unit. Based on the positive results, we have adapted thelearning experience for the Grade 10-12 Engineering byDesign™
Advanced Technological Applications course offered by ITEEA's
STEM Center for Teaching and Learning. Here, we describe
the design experience, as adapted for the 2018 release of theAdvanced Technological Applications course and share resources
to enable teaching these lessons. In the experience, students
fabricate and redesign soft robot fingers using provided materials
before designing and fabricating their own gripper.
Our use of soft robotics is situated in an agricultural context. The
advantages of a soft gripper here include the ability to grasp avariety of objects, to do so without damaging the produce, andto alleviate ergonomic concerns from the repetition of the task.
Playing to the strengths of soft robots to handle delicate objects
without damage, we challenge student pairs to design a pneumatically inflatable soft gripper that can pick up simulated produce (a golf-ball to represent a tomato). The gripper is made ofa silicone rubber, cured (solidified) by mixing two parts together
and waiting the prescribed time. Fabrication steps are describedin more detail in the next section, and more details can be foundin Jackson, Mentzer, Kramer, and Zhang (2017).
To begin design, students build a foundational understandingof necessary scientific principles through instruction related topneumatics and conducting research related to soft robotics.
The growing prevalence of soft robotics research means thatstudents can find information by searching online, though we
specifically direct them to the Soft Robotics Toolkit pages about“pneunets bending actuators” and “fiber-reinforced actuators.”
We do acknowledge that there are other approaches that may
also be successful in a classroom application, but using pneunets(short for pneumatic networks) with cloth fiber reinforcement has
been successful in our grant project. Two structural aspects of
the robots will enable it to curve around the tomato to pick it up:
the configuration of the inner air chambers, and an “inextensible
layer” of fabric that constrains inflation (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Cross-section of soft robot finger showing air chambers andinextensible fabric layer.
12 technology and engineering teacher March 2020

As part of their research to understand how the soft robot will
behave in various configurations, students use a 3D printed moldto test various soft robot finger designs for their effect on robot
movement. Students focus on understanding the design andfabrication process using this mold. The reconfigurable mold for
the Advanced Technology Applications course has had several
iterations in our research, allowing students to adjust the placement of clips to change the configuration of the inner air chamber (Figure 3). The performance differences, based on a few key
variables, can also be discussed as a class. In our classes, suchconsiderations directly relate to the constraints and criteria we
encourage students to develop while designing and testing. Furthermore, it is necessary for students to document their designideas and test results as research evidence to inform their final
gripper design.
Designing and making successful soft robot fingers is an iterative process—it is harder than it seems, and the first attempts
may not produce robots that inflate, or they may not curve in a
desirable way. One of the difficulties of soft robot design is theprecision required—a complication of the nature of the materials
and manual fabrication process (Wang, et al., 2015). One expert
observed, “if you have small structures, a small difference infabrication makes a big difference for the behavior of the materials and the whole mechanisms” (Trimmer, et al., 2013, p. 68). It istherefore important that students carefully document and reflect
on their process. Group discussion and failure analysis are useful
to identify principles for successful fabrication and design of thegrippers. With soft robotics, failure analysis is relatively simple
and begins with observation, hypothesis, and testing in a future
iteration. For instance, failure to inflate might be because of aleak that becomes obvious by listening for the air escaping or
submerging the soft actuator in water to identify air bubbles.
Further insight can be realized by cutting the actuators and observing a cross section as shown in Figure 2. Students are able
to make observations and discuss their theories. They can create
tests to confirm their thinking—for example, students might
speculate that inconsistences in thickness cause one finger toinflate before another. By allowing their silicone to cure in a moldthat is not level, they can create extreme differences in thickness
between two fingers and observe the results to confirm or challenge their hypothesis. Whole-class discussions can be rich with
scientific argumentation as students use evidence to support
their claims. Students can try again, as needed, based on viableclass time because the process is iterative and relatively cheapand fast.
Through phases of making several soft robot fingers with theprovided mold and the fabrication process described further
later in this article, students build a conceptual understanding ofsoft robot actuators. After students have this understanding andcuriosity about how other variables impact the design, they arechallenged to design their own gripper mold using CAD softwaresoft robotics as emerging technologies: preparing students for future work through soft robot design experiences
and a 3D printer. Ultimately, students follow similar fabrication
steps to make the gripper as they did to make the fingers. One
difference between the finger and the gripper is the amount ofsilicone used (since it is a larger product) and another differenceis the addition of a coupler through which to inflate the gripper.
Third, the gripper is a little more complex because of balancing
the inflation of multiple fingers.
We conclude the design challenge by having students demonstrate their design and present about their process, decisionmaking, and ideas for improvement. The full curriculum in the
Advanced Technological Applications course provides teacherswith a lesson about the soft robot fingers and a gripper design
challenge that includes suggestions for extensions as well as
troubleshooting support. The process, while challenging, isconceptually simple, and we describe it here as nine fabrication
steps.

Fabrication of Pneumatically Actuated Soft
Robots
1. Gather the necessary materials. Supplies include the 3D
printed mold components (image, page 8 – finger mold shown
above, gripper mold shown below), silicone (Ecoflex 00-30 by
Smooth-On), disposable gloves (polyethylene—not nitrile orlatex), safety glasses, measuring cups, a stirring stick, parchment
paper for a work surface, scissors, fabric, and a soccer or volleyball pump for testing. If using heat in Step 4 or Step 5, be surethe plastic mold is resilient to the needed temperatures—we use
Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) for printing for this reason.
2. Design the soft robot. This includes arranging the clips in theprovided finger mold or CAD work for the gripper design.

Figure 3. Demonstration of clip arrangement impacts on soft robot
actuation. A) A single large chamber made by placing clips next to eachother; B) two slightly separated clips; C) three pairs of clips; D) fiveevenly spaced clips; E) a three finger gripper design; and F) a four finger
gripper design with different finger lengths. Figure originally included in
Zhang, J., Jackson, A., Mentzer, N., & Kramer, R. (2017). A modular, reconfigurable mold for a K-12 soft robotic gripper design activity. Frontiers inRobotics and AI, 4, 1-8. doi: 10.3389/frobt.2017.00046.

clogs the air chambers. If thelayer of silicone is so thin thatthe threads of fabric are visible, it is too thin and may notadhere sufficiently. The gripper
should be laid on the fabric,
and the silicone can be welled
up around the edges to reinforce the connection. For a gripper,
attach the coupler on top in the center. Then let this cure with thesame process as Step 4.

3. Mix and pour silicone. Mix
the desired amount of Ecoflex
using a 1:1 ratio of Part A andPart B. Stir gently for at least
1 minute, then, on a piece ofparchment paper, fill the mold.

6. Testing. Peel your robot
off the parchment paper andinsert the pump. Inflate it towatch the finger or gripper
actuate because of the airchambers and fabric. Consider
the curvature patterns of thefingers.

4. Cure and demold. Allow thesilicone to cure for 4 hours atroom temperature, or 15 minutes at 150° Fahrenheit. Afterthe material is cured, pull it outof the mold.

7. Iterate. Did the robot work the way you expected it to? How
do you think changing your design would change the functionality? To be most effective, iteration should be deliberate: test
your robot, identify problems, and brainstorm ways to address
the problem through a different design or fabrication process.
Systematically change some design variables and try again.

5. Attach the fabric. Mix enough Ecoflex to saturate a piece offabric and attach the top half of the robot. The layer of Ecoflex on
the fabric should be deep enough that there is a good connection. We suggest looking at the layer from an angle and seeingthat the surface is smooth and reflective—but not so deep that it

8. Troubleshoot. There may be a few reasons your robot didn’t
work: Was there a hole in the silicone? Did it stay attached to
the fabric? Did it inflate evenly? Think critically and change yourdesign or fabrication process.
March 2020 technology and engineering teacher 13

soft robotics as emerging technologies: preparing students for future work through soft robot design experiences
9. Demonstrate your design solution. Use your completed gripper
and design journal to share your process. Share your design and why you
made those decisions. Demonstrate
how your gripper works.

Conclusion
This work demonstrates that, as educators, we can identify an
emerging technology and bring it into the classroom to help
prepare students for jobs that don’t even exist yet. In our project,
we identified soft robotics as a developing technology that has
many varied applications, from agriculture to prosthetics andfrom acoustic dampening to wheeled motion and flight. Current
examples of soft robotics provide visible benefits in humancentered applications, which research indicates is engaging forstudents. Furthermore, closely examining these uses of soft robotics can reveal the underlying mechanisms and cultivate ideas
for futuristic problem-solving and innovation. We propose that
our approach may be a model for teachers and other curriculum
developers to identify emerging technologies and transfer theminto the classroom.

References
Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal ofEngineering Education, 97(3), 369-387. doi: 10.1002/j.21689830.2008.tb00985.x.
Decker, M. (2015, September). Soft robotics and emergent materials in architecture. Paper presented at the Real Time - 33rd
International Conference on Education and Research in
Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe (eCAADe),
Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from www.ecaade.org
Farias, O., Jr., Nieminen, N., Strock, C., Kress-Gazit, H., & Shepherd, R. (2015). Soft wheel robot, submission from Cornell
University. Retrieved from Soft Robotics Toolkit website:
http://softroboticstoolkit.com/soft-wheel-robot
International Technology Education Association (ITEA/ITEEA).
(2007). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the
study of technology (3rd ed.). Reston, VA: Author.
Jackson, A., Mentzer, N., Kramer, R., & Zhang, J. (2017, June). Maker: Taking soft robotics from the laboratory to the classroom.
Paper presented at the Make It! Event during the 2017 ASEE
Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, OH. Retrieved
from https://peer.asee.org/27741
Munce, R. & Fraser, E. (2013). Where are the STEM students?
Retrieved from www.stemconnector.org
National Academy of Engineering. (2004). The engineer of 2020:
Visions of engineering in the new century. Washington, DC:
National Academies Press.

Pellegrino, J. W. & Hilton, M. L. (Eds.). (2012). Education for life
and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in
the 21st century. Washington, DC: The National Academies
Press.
Polygerinos, P., Wang, Z., Galloway, K. C., Wood, R. J., & Walsh, C.
J. (2015). Soft robotic glove for combined assistance and athome rehabilitation. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 73,
135-143. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2014.08.014
Roche, E. T., Horvath, M. A., Wamala, I., Alazmani, A., Song, S.-E.,
Whyte, W., . . . Walsh, C.J. (2017). Soft robotic sleeve supports
heart function. Science Translational Medicine, 9(373). doi:
10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf3925.
Trimmer, B., Ewoldt, R. H., Kovac, M., Lipson, H., Lu, N., Shahinpoor, M., & Majidi, C. (2013). At the crossroads: Interdisciplinary paths to soft robots. Soft Robotics, 1(1), 63-69. doi:
10.1089/soro.2013.1509.
Villanueva, A., Smith, C., & Priya, S. (2011). A biomimetic robotic
jellyfish (robojelly) actuated by shape memory alloy composite actuators. Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 6(3), 1-16.
Retrieved from http://stacks.iop.org/1748-3190/6/i=3/
a=036004
Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2010). 21st century skills discussion
paper. (Report prepared for Kennisnet). Enschede, the Netherlands: University of Twente. Retrieved from http://opite.
pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/61995295/White%20Paper.
Wang, Z., Chen, M.Z.Q., & Yi, J. (2015). Soft robotics forengineers. HKIE Transactions, 22(2), 88-97. doi:
10.1080/1023697X.2015.1038321.
Xie, J., McGovern, J. B., Patel, R., Kim, W., Dutt, S., & Mazzeo, A.
D. (2015). Elastomeric actuators on airfoils for aerodynamic
control of lift and drag. Advanced Engineering Materials,
17(7), 951-960. doi: 10.1002/adem.201500036.
Acknowledgement: This material was supported by the
National Science Foundation under Grant DRL-1513175.
Andrew Jackson is an assistant professor ofWorkforce Education at the University ofGeorgia. He can be reached atandrewjackson@uga.edu.
Nathan Mentzer is an associate professorof Technology and Engineering Education at
Purdue University.

Rebecca Kramer-Bottiglio is an assistantprofessor of Mechanical Engineering andMaterials Science at Yale University.

This is a refereed article.
14 technology and engineering teacher March 2020