New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

This Robot Copies Life—By Decomposing

A new soft robotic arm and its controller break down naturally

Illustration of two robots, sinking into the earth

Thomas Fuchs

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Picture a robot. What do you see? A rugged, steel-clad machine built to transcend living beings’ organic fragility? Unfortunately, this very quality now threatens to drown the planet in extremely durable e-waste. What if, instead, our increasingly prevalent machines were designed to decay and disappear—like life does?

For a study in Science Advances, researchers crafted a robotic arm, and a joysticklike controller to operate it, from pork gelatin and plant cellulose—materials sturdy enough to function yet delicate enough to degrade in backyard compost. After testing, both origamilike structures disintegrated in soil within weeks.

Biodegradable robotics often falls under the umbrella of soft robotics, which draws inspiration from nature’s more pliable creations. “The field originated from materials science and chemistry rather than conventional robots that come from mechanical engineering,” says materials scientist Florian Hartmann of the Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems in Stuttgart, Germany. But a lot of early soft robotics prototypes still relied on synthetic polymers that linger as pollution.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Pingdong Wei, a materials scientist working with natural polymers at Westlake University in Hangzhou, teamed up with his friend Zhuang Zhang, a robotics engineer now at Fudan University in Shanghai, to assemble robots for the new study. Wei had long been intrigued by robotics, Zhang recalls, and raised the idea of creating a robot himself. “That’s when I thought, Why not use the materials he works with to build one?”

They started with cellulose layers derived from cotton pulp, then added glycerol for flexibility and dried the layers for strength. “Cellulose is also cheap and easy to assemble,” Wei says. To build sensors, the researchers used a conductive gelatin extracted from pork, in which the flow of ions changes when the material is stretched, bent or pressed. They then folded the flat films and sensors into 3D structures.

Wei and Zhang found that the controller and robotic arm stood up to both heavy use and a week of inactivity. Finally, they buried them both in a 20-centimeter-deep hole near their campus. Within eight weeks the machines were almost entirely gone.

“The way the researchers were able to engineer something so rigid yet so soft is impressive,” says robotics engineer Ellen Rumley, who is also at the Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems. Neither Rumley nor Hartmann was involved in the study.

Wei and Zhang envision bots like these handling hazardous waste and then dissolving; they also propose robots that aid surgeries and then safely break down inside the body. But it’s important to note that the technology is in very early stages.

“If we truly want to have a sustainable robot that goes outside in nature,” Hartmann says, “we also need to think of electronics or power supplies, or even batteries, that are biodegradable.”

Saugat Bolakhe is a freelance science journalist. He studied zoology as an undergraduate in Nepal and received a master’s degree from the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism at the City University of New York. His work has appeared in Scientific American, Nature, New Scientist, Quanta, Eos, Discover, Knowable and other publications.

More by Saugat Bolakhe
Scientific American Magazine Vol 332 Issue 5This article was published with the title “Death by Design” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 332 No. 5 (), p. 17
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican052025-6cLG5ciJZRBDGKA9siiEuy

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe