Table 1 Climbing robots comparison.

T, tethered; UT, untethered; N/A, not available.

Climbing robotAdhesion strategyBL (mm)Robot mass (g)Maximum voltage (V)Incline range (°)Maximum velocity
for given incline (BL s−1)
HAMR-E, TElectroadhesion451.482500–1800°: 3.1
90°: 0.026
180°: 0.10
Electroadhesive climbing robots
Wang et al. (19), TElectroadhesion183491000–900°: 0.58
90°: 0.56
Wang et al. (51), TElectroadhesion173946000–9090°: 0.2
Prahlad et al. (40), TElectroadhesion40018040000–9090°: 0.375
Yamamoto et al. (39), TElectroadhesion30032715000–9090°: 0.022
Liu et al. (20), UTElectroadhesion36070030000–9090°: <0.001
Other legged climbing robots < 100 g
Hawkes et al. (11), TDry adhesion120.02N/A0–90Not reported
Hawkes et al. (11), UTDry adhesion3093.70–9090°: 0.6
Greuter et al. (10), UTDry adhesion40103.70–9090°: 0.08
Birkmeyer et al. (52), UTSpines100153.70–9090°: 1.5
Breckwoldt et al. (12), UTDry adhesion47223.70–18090°: 1.6
180°: 1.8
Murphy et al. (7), UTDry adhesion9685N/A0–1800°: 0.5
90°: 0.5
180°: 0.5