Service robotics encompasses a wide range of applications, from inventory management and interacting with people to manipulating objects. Selecting the appropriate form and capabilities for a robot begins with the specific task it needs to perform. Francesco Ferro explores this idea in chapter 36 of Toque de Ingenio, where he details the history of PAL Robotics and the distinctions between a technological demonstration and a genuinely useful tool.
Guest: Francesco Ferro, co-founder of PAL Robotics.
Interview published: February 3, 2025. Episode: 36. Duration: 1 h 31 min.
In this episode:
- Why a stock inventory robot and a social robot might need different forms.
- How a modular platform facilitates the development of new manipulation applications.
- What should be considered when evaluating a demonstration and its potential real-world use.
Francesco places the origins of PAL Robotics in a project to build a robot designed to play chess. The interview traces the accumulated learning from that initial project, and the products and projects described as of February 2025.
Start by focusing on the function that provides value.
The episode demonstrates how service robotics can address specific operational needs. Instead of discussing a generic robot capable of everything, Francesco uses examples related to inventory, interaction, and manipulation. Each application has a distinct way of justifying its usefulness.
In a store, knowing what products are available and where they are located aids staff’s work. In a social setting, the function can involve welcoming or interacting with visitors. Technical capabilities are assessed using different objectives and should not be judged solely based on the robot’s appearance.
This distinction guides the initial development decisions. Sensors, mobility, arms, and the interface should be selected based on the task and the environment. Adding a capability that isn’t needed can increase complexity without improving the outcome the client expects.
For projects of engineering and automation, The initial question is what task the system should perform, and how we will verify that it performs it correctly. A specific definition allows us to prioritize resources and prepare tests related to its intended use.
A tracking robot designed to go unnoticed.
Francesco describes a mobile platform that tracks items within stores, designed to help maintain inventory and locate products. The value isn’t just knowing that a particular item exists, but in finding it when it’s not where it should be. This information can save staff time spent searching.
The commercial environment presents challenges that aren’t evident in a laboratory setting. The conversation refers to coordinating with alarms, schedules, and other implementation details. A robot that operates autonomously needs to integrate with the existing systems and routines of the establishment.
The exterior appearance also reflects the task at hand. For a team focused on inventory, attracting the attention of visitors could interfere with their work. Francesco explains that, in that case:
“The idea is precisely not to give it a human form”.
Francesco Ferro 22:27.
The observation reveals that the interaction design includes deciding when it’s not desired to initiate interaction. An object may need to be both understandable and safe, without encouraging play. The appearance has operational consequences and should be evaluated within its context.
Social interaction presents additional requirements.
Francesco contrasts that use with robots designed to interact with people. In the interview, he mentions experiences involving welcoming and participation in commercial spaces. In these instances, the appearance and expressive resources are an integral part of the intended function.
The dialogue explores the relationship between human appearance and expectations. A robot that appears capable of conversing or understanding a situation can create an expectation that then needs to be maintained. Designing its presence requires considering what a person will interpret when they see it.
It also distinguishes between social interaction and physical interaction. Simply speaking or conveying information doesn’t carry the same demands as, for example, helping to move an object or making contact with a person. Each application needs to define its own specific capabilities and operating conditions.
From the User experience design, The case highlights that interface, form, and behavior communicate together. People don’t perceive separate hardware and software modules; they perceive a single behavior. Consistency between what the robot suggests and what it can actually do influences trust.
Tiago and the value of a platform that can evolve.
Francesco presents TIAGO as a platform developed with a strong focus on research. Its configuration combines mobility and manipulation, and allows for the integration of various sensors and equipment. This flexibility makes it easier for other groups to develop their own applications.
The guest links modularity with the possibility of adding functionality.
“without having to buy a new robot”.
Francesco Ferro 35:50.
The platform offers a foundation for experimentation, but the specific application still requires further development. Changing a sensor or tool opens up new possibilities, but also necessitates integration. A modular system needs to clearly define how its components connect.
The conversation includes an example of research in agriculture, where the manipulation tool is adapted to a specific task. A single arm cannot independently interact with any object; the end that holds or acts upon it must respond to the task being performed.
This principle is beneficial for companies that design families of machines. A common base can reduce repetitive work, while modules allow for specialization of functions. The architecture gains value when it maintains clear interfaces and conditions for each combination.
Shared software reduces integration effort.
Francesco explains the use of ROS as a software foundation for communicating and integrating components. The aim is for developers to be able to focus on their algorithms and capabilities, rather than constantly rebuilding the underlying infrastructure.
The interview also mentions PAL Robotics’ contributions to shared tools. This work facilitates the combination of modules and the linking of different systems. Interoperability is presented as a practical necessity when an application incorporates components or robots from various sources.
The key aspect of development is to determine which parts should be handled by the platform and which belong to the application itself. A stable infrastructure can speed up experiments and simplify maintenance. To achieve this, the team needs to understand the dependencies and ensure that the whole system functions as expected.
In the validation of a robot, the prototypes This allows us to observe that integration in action. The test should go beyond each isolated module; it’s important to see how the entire sequence behaves and what happens when the environmental conditions change.
From a demonstration to a repeatable operation.
Edgar is asking to see videos of humanoid robots performing impressive tasks. Francesco suggests examining what’s behind the demonstration: the level of autonomy, the preparation of the environment, and how the result was achieved. A video can demonstrate a capability without explaining all the underlying conditions.
The conversation compares wheeled robots with robots that have legs. Francesco links the choice to the terrain and the need to overcome certain obstacles. The most suitable option depends on the application – a flat surface can accommodate different solutions than a route with stairs.
That criterion helps to evaluate proposals that focus less on spectacle and more on substance. Repeatability, operational cost, and suitability for the environment are important. The capabilities should be assessed in relation to the actual task the client needs to solve.
What can another development team learn?
- Define the task before selecting the robot’s appearance, mobility, and tools.
- Design the interaction that is most suitable for the operation, including the possibility of remaining undetected.
- Using modular platforms with clear interfaces to develop diverse applications.
- Assess demonstrations based on their conditions, autonomy, and ability to reproduce the result.
PAL Robotics demonstrates how accumulated experience translates into specific product decisions. For companies developing automation systems or equipment that need to interact with their environment, i-mas can help define requirements and prepare a useful validation process. Tell us about the challenge you want to tackle..
To continue reading: Automation of warehouse picking with Illumo Robotics.
Source of article: Interview with Edgar Guerrero with Francesco Ferro on Toque de Ingenio, published on February 3, 2025. The quotes link to their passages in the video; the key takeaways are a summarized editorial version of the conversation.
