Science Robotics

Supplementary Materials

The PDF file includes:

  • Materials and Methods
  • Fig. S1. Schematic diagram of overall preparation of the QUPA/ANF membranes.
  • Fig. S2. Proposed reaction mechanism for PVA chains functionalization with DMOAP.
  • Fig. S3. PVA and functionalized QUPA composite comparison by XPS spectrum.
  • Fig. S4. Top-view SEM images of the PVA and QUPA membranes at different magnifications.
  • Fig. S5. SEM and corresponding EDS mapping images of PVA and QUPA membranes.
  • Fig. S6. Preparation of ANFs.
  • Fig. S7. Thermogravimetry curve comparison for the QUPA/ANF composite membrane with different ANF dispersion concentrations.
  • Fig. S8. SEM images of cross-section morphology of ANF and QUPA/ANF membranes.
  • Fig. S9. The morphology and color comparisons of the ANF-2.0 membrane after immersing into QUPA polymer solution.
  • Fig. S10. The pore surface area comparison of porous ANF-2.0 membrane and QUPA/ANF-2.0 composite membrane according to the BET analysis.
  • Fig. S11. The toughness values of QUPA/ANF with different ANF dispersion concentrations from 0.5 to 2.0 wt %.
  • Fig. S12. The initial impedance spectra comparison of QUPA/ANF composite membrane with different ANF dispersion concentrations.
  • Fig. S13. Digital photos of the folding and releasing process of QUPA/ANF-2.0 membrane.
  • Fig. S14. SEM images of QUPA/ANF-2.0 membrane under different states.
  • Fig. S15. Fracture energy of QUPA/ANF-2.0 membrane.
  • Fig. S16. The initial impedance spectra comparison of PVA, QUPA, and QUPA/ANF-2.0.
  • Fig. S17. The temperature-dependent ionic conductivity comparison of PVA, QUPA, and QUPA/ANF-2.0 membranes.
  • Fig. S18. The Arrhenius plot comparison of PVA, QUPA, and QUPA/ANF-2.0 membranes.
  • Fig. S19. The ion concentration and IEC comparison of PVA, QUPA, and QUPA/ANF-2.0 membranes.
  • Fig. S20. Comparison of the shape changes of QUPA and QUPA/ANF-2.0 membranes after drying at room temperature until a constant weight and dimension were obtained.
  • Fig. S21. Schematic representation of the rechargeable zinc-air battery.
  • Fig. S22. The XRD pattern of the cycled zinc electrode with QUPA electrolyte.
  • Fig. S23. The performance of zinc-air battery with different bending angles.
  • Fig. S24. Robot measures used in the calculations of its surface area.
  • Fig. S25. The size of original Li-ion battery.
  • Fig. S26. Comparison of working time of the robot with original Li-ion battery and six structural zinc-air batteries.
  • Table S1. Graph theoretical enumerators for description of ANF percolating network materials characterizing network connectivity.
  • Table S2. Comparison of tensile strength, tensile modulus, and elongation at break of QUPA, ANF, and QUPA/ANF composite membranes.
  • Table S3. Comparison of tensile strength, Young’s modulus, and elongation at break data for different fiber enhanced polymer hydrogels.
  • Table S4. Comparison of ionic conductivities of previously developed solid or gel electrolytes.
  • Table S5. Comparison of ionic conductivity, IEC, ion concentration, water uptake, and swelling ratio of QUPA and QUPA/ANF composite membranes.
  • Table S6. Summary of solid or gel state flexible rechargeable zinc-air batteries with various electrocatalysts and electrolytes.
  • Table S7. Summary of the surface area of the robot with different parts of robot.
  • Table S8. Comparison of battery properties from this work and in drones in (6).

Download PDF

Other Supplementary Material for this manuscript includes the following:

  • Movie S1 (.mp4 format). The demonstration of biomorphic structural battery in battery-less humanoid robotic device.
  • Movie S2 (.mp4 format). The demonstration of biomorphic structural battery in battery-less scorpion minibot.
  • Movie S3 (.mp4 format). Overview of design and implementation of biomimetic composites and biomorphic structural batteries for robotics.

Files in this Data Supplement: