Robotics 12 00074 v2

robotics
Review
Watch the Next Step: A Comprehensive Survey of
Stair-Climbing Vehicles
Antonio Pappalettera † , Francesco Bottiglione † , Giacomo Mantriota † and Giulio Reina *,†
Dipartimento di Meccanica, Matematica e Management, Politecnico di Bari, 70126 Bari, Italy;

antonio.pappalettera@poliba.it (A.P.); giacomo.mantriota@poliba.it (G.M.)
* Correspondence: giulio.reina@poliba.it
† These authors contributed equally to this work.
Abstract: Stair climbing is one of the most challenging tasks for vehicles, especially when transporting
people and heavy loads. Although many solutions have been proposed and demonstrated in practice,
it is necessary to further improve their climbing ability and safety. This paper presents a systematic
review of the scientific and engineering stair climbing literature, providing brief descriptions of the
mechanism and method of operation and highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of different
types of climbing platform. To quantitatively evaluate the system performance, various metrics are
presented that consider allowable payload, maximum climbing speed, maximum crossable slope,
transport ability and their combinations. Using these metrics, it is possible to compare vehicles with
different locomotion modes and properties, allowing researchers and practitioners to gain in-depth
knowledge of stair-climbing vehicles and choose the best category for transporting people and heavy
loads up a flight of stairs.
Keywords: stair-climbing vehicles; mobile robotics; obstacle negotiation; assistive technology; mobility
impairment; architectural barriers
1. Introduction
Citation: Pappalettera, A.; The number of people affected by any form of physical disability represents a sig-
Bottiglione, F.; Mantriota, G.; Reina, nificant part of the world population, from children to adults alike. It is estimated that
G. Watch the Next Step: A approximately 131 million or 1.85% of people require wheelchairs in the world [1]. Almost
Comprehensive Survey of Stair- 1% of United States population currently uses a wheelchair. Half of them must overcome
Climbing Vehicles. Robotics 2023, 12, steps to enter and exit their homes. A similar fraction report having difficulty entering or
74. https://doi.org/10.3390/ leaving the home [2]. In any case, there are also people without disabilities to consider.
robotics12030074 According to the National Center for Health Statistics (Hyattsville, MD, USA), only in the
Academic Editor: Dan Zhang USA, the percent of adults aged 18 and over with any difficulty walking or climbing steps
in 2020 is 18.0%, almost 60 million of people [3].
Received: 31 March 2023 Despite that, the worldwide number of people who find it difficult to overcome
Revised: 9 May 2023
architectural barriers daily has not yet been estimated. Because the world population is
Accepted: 13 May 2023
aging, the people mobility problems are of increasing importance. In Italy, many multi-story
Published: 18 May 2023
residential buildings are not accessible by people with disabilities or walking problems
because in them there is no elevator (or similar) for connection to the upper floors. The
situation in schools is no better. The ISTAT (The Italian National Institute of Statistics)
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
sources reveal that only 32% of them are barrier-free. In 63% of cases, the reason for the
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. lack of accessibility is the lack of an elevator or the presence of a lift that is not suitable for
This article is an open access article the transport of people with motor disabilities [4].
distributed under the terms and Ground vehicles can help to solve these problems [5,6]. They face many challenges, in-
conditions of the Creative Commons cluding the negotiation of obstacles [7,8], stairs [9,10] and uneven terrain [11–14]. Recently,
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// much attention has been attracted by solutions that allow to overcome a series of steps
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ towards stair-climbing platforms [15]. In order to design a ground vehicle that can success-
4.0/). fully transport people and heavy loads up a flight of stairs, we started to look at existing
Robotics 2023, 12, 74. https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics12030074 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/robotics

Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 43
steps towards stair-climbing platforms [15]. In order to design a ground vehicle that can
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 2 of 37
successfully transport people and heavy loads up a flight of stairs, we started to look at
existing solutions to obtain useful information for design purposes. However, the stair-
climbing literature is very sparse and poorly organized. In this paper, an attempt to survey
solutions to obtain
the state-of-the-art in thisuseful
field information for design
is pursued. Since all thepurposes. However, entail
solutions proposed the stair-climbing
a rather
high level of automation, we will refer throughout the paper interchangeably tosurvey
literature is very sparse and poorly organized. In this paper, an attempt to stair- the
climbing robots or vehicles. However, some of the prototypes included in the survey arehigh
state-of-the-art in this field is pursued. Since all the solutions proposed entail a rather
humanlevel of automation,
operated and notwe fullywill refer throughout
autonomous. the paperaspect
One common interchangeably
is that all theto proposed
stair-climbing
robots or vehicles. However, some
solutions use a fully electric propulsion system. of the prototypes included in the survey are human
operated and not fully autonomous. One common aspect is that
Stair climbing is a very challenging task for a mobile robot. It is now necessary all the proposed solutions
to
use a fully electric propulsion system.
define what is meant by robots that climb stairs. The idea is to look at those vehicles that
Stair climbing
have the ability is a very
to overcome, challenging
without task formuscular
the human a mobile robot.
help, anIt isarchitectural
now necessary to define
barrier
what is meant by robots that climb stairs. The idea is to look at those
such as the one shown in Figure 1, adapting itself effectively to different lengths of rise, vehicles that have the
ability to overcome, without the human muscular help, an architectural barrier such as the
run, tread and respecting the presence of nosing. During the whole obstacle negotiation
one shown in Figure 1, adapting itself effectively to different lengths of rise, run, tread and
stage, safety and tip over stability need to be guaranteed while avoiding immobilization
respecting the presence of nosing. During the whole obstacle negotiation stage, safety and
conditions.
tip over stability need to be guaranteed while avoiding immobilization conditions.
Figure
Figure 1. Staircase
1. Staircase nomenclature.
nomenclature. Typical
Typical values
values for for
runrun
areare 22.8–27.9
22.8–27.9 cm,cm, rise
rise 20.3cm,
20.3 cm,nosing
nosing2.5
2.5 cm.
cm.
Many climbing systems configurations, which include legged-type, crawler-type,
wheeled-type, or combination of the previous, have been proposed in the literature as
Many climbing systems configurations, which include legged-type, crawler-type,
effective solutions to climb a flight of stairs in addition to driving on regular flat surfaces.
wheeled-type, or combination of the previous, have been proposed in the literature as
These mobile robots can be manually controlled, semi-automated or fully automated using
effective solutions to climb a flight of stairs in addition to driving on regular flat surfaces.
software algorithm combined with embedded CPUs, sensors and cameras [16].
These mobile robots can be manually controlled, semi-automated or fully automated us-
This paper surveys the current state of the art of stair-climbing robots to provide
ing software algorithm combined with embedded CPUs, sensors and cameras [16].
an at-a-glance view of the vast literature, including both commercial and research exam-
This paper surveys the current state of the art of stair-climbing robots to provide an
ples. Another important contribution refers to the introduction of metrics to quantitatively
at-a-glance view of the vast literature, including both commercial and research examples.
evaluate the climbing performance and allow vehicles with heterogenous properties and
Another important contribution refers to the introduction of metrics to quantitatively
locomotion types to be fairly compared. While the previous literature reviews have focused
evaluate the climbing performance and allow vehicles with heterogenous properties and
on specific aspects, including step-climbing ability of power wheelchairs [17], traction
locomotion types toofbe
characteristics fairly compared.
explosive ordnance While the(EOD)
disposal previous literature
robots reviews
[18], tracked have fo- sys-
locomotion
cusedtems [19] and load carriage assistive devices [20], here a comprehensive overview trac-
on specific aspects, including step-climbing ability of power wheelchairs [17], covering
tion acharacteristics
wide range ofofstair-climbing
explosive ordnance disposal
vehicles (EOD) robots [18], tracked locomotion
is presented.
systems [19]
Thisand
workload carriage assistive
is intended devices [20],
to be prescriptive here
for the a comprehensive
readers. The proposed overview cov- of
methodology
eringanalysis,
a wide range of stair-climbing vehicles is presented.
based on quantitative measurable metrics such as allowable payload, maximum
This work
climbing is intended
speed, maximum to becrossable
prescriptive
slopefor thetransport
and readers.ability,
The proposed methodology
can be used as an effective
of analysis,
criterion to obtain important robot features that cannot be deduced a priori maxi-
based on quantitative measurable metrics such as allowable payload, through a
mumsingle
climbing speed, maximum
qualitative analysis ofcrossable slope andsystems.
the stair-climbing transportResearchers
ability, can and
be used as an can
engineers
choose exactly the most suitable stair climbing solution to meet the project requirements
based on and learning from the results presented in the following when designing new
stair-climbing vehicles.
effective criterion to obtain important robot features that cannot be deduced a priori
through a single qualitative analysis of the stair-climbing systems. Researchers and engi-
neers can choose exactly the most suitable stair climbing solution to meet the project re-
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 3 of 37
quirements based on and learning from the results presented in the following when de-
signing new stair-climbing vehicles.
The article is organized as follows. Section 2 proposes a general categorization of
climbingThe articleconsidering
vehicles is organized as follows.
payload Section
capacity and 2locomotion
proposes amode.
general categorization
Next, a detailed of
climbing vehicles considering payload capacity and locomotion mode. Next, a detailed
description of the different families of robots is provided in Section 3. Section 4 presents
performance measures and a side-by-side comparison among the various vehicle presents
description of the different families of robots is provided in Section 3. Section 4 type,
performance
along measures
with a discussion of and
cost aand
side-by-side comparison
complexity. among
Finally, Section the various
5 concludes vehicle
this surveytype,
along with a discussion of cost and complexity. Finally, Section 5 concludes this
providing relevant conclusions as to which category of robot is best able to transport peo- survey
providing relevant conclusions as to which category of robot is best able to transport people
ple and heavy loads up a flight of stairs.
and heavy loads up a flight of stairs.
2. Categorization of Stair-Climbing Vehicles
2. Categorization of Stair-Climbing Vehicles
ManyManyexamples
examples of stair-climbing
of stair-climbing vehicles have
vehicles been
have beenproposed
proposedandand
demonstrated.
demonstrated.
They can be divided into broad categories according to the
They can be divided into broad categories according to the scheme shown scheme shown in Figure 2. 2.
in Figure
OneOneof the main aspects to consider is whether the robot is designed to carry
of the main aspects to consider is whether the robot is designed to carry a payload. a payload.
Therefore, thethe
Therefore, first main
first mainclassification
classificationcancanbe
be made
made by by differentiating
differentiating“payload
“payloadrobots”
robots”from
from “no payload robots”. In this classification, we consider payload may be
“no payload robots”. In this classification, we consider payload may be people, animals or people, ani-
mals or goods
goods that should
that should be carried
be carried safelysafely
by thebyrobot
the robot
throughthrough a desired
a desired path. path.
On the On the
contrary,
contrary, equipment attached to the robot and not directly involved in the
equipment attached to the robot and not directly involved in the motion ability, such asmotion ability,
such as additional
additional sensors
sensors and and cameras,
cameras, robotic
robotic armsarmsand and
tools,tools, are considered
are not not considered as pay-but
as payload
loadrather
but rather part of the robots
part of the robots itself. itself.
Figure 2. Categorization
Figure chart
2. Categorization for Stair-Climbing
chart Vehicles.
for Stair-Climbing Vehicles.
Payload
Payload robots
robots cancan be further
be further divided
divided intointo wheelchair
wheelchair andand carrier
carrier type.
type. Wheelchair
Wheelchair
types
types are are systems
systems in which
in which a wheelchair
a wheelchair for for
the the transport
transport of aofperson
a person is used.
is used. In carrier
In carrier
types, a container is used instead to allocate
types, a container is used instead to allocate goods. goods.
Finally,
Finally, wheelchair
wheelchair type,
type, carrier
carrier typetype
andand no payload
no payload robots
robots cancan be divided
be divided according
according
to the
to the stair-climbing
stair-climbing mechanism
mechanism used.
used. These
These mechanisms
mechanisms belong
belong to five
to five mainmain categories:
categories:
track-based,
track-based, wheel
wheel cluster-based,
cluster-based, articulated
articulated mechanism-based,
mechanism-based, hybrid
hybrid andand leg-based
leg-based andand
wheel-based
wheel-based systems.systems.
(1) (1) Track-based
Track-based mechanisms
mechanisms have
have the the largest
largest ground
ground contact
contact surface
surface andand
are are
veryvery stable
stable
duedue
to a to a lower
lower center
center of gravity.
of gravity. To facilitate
To facilitate the the stair-climbing
stair-climbing process,
process, tracks
tracks cancan
be be
equipped
equipped withwith teeth.
teeth. Track-based
Track-based mechanisms
mechanisms enable
enable robots
robots to climb
to climb updown
up or or down
the the
stairs
stairs at aatconstant
a constant speed
speed in in a stable
a stable mannerdue
manner duetotothe
theinterlocking
interlocking effect between
between the
track’s outer teeth and the steps’ sharp corner. There are no problems regarding the
different length of rise, run, tread and noising of the stair steps’ shape. The track-based
mechanisms are widely adopted.
(2) Wheel cluster-based mechanisms: A wheel cluster is a component with multiple wheels
uniformly distributed in the same plane around a common center. While using a stair-
the track’s outer teeth and the steps’ sharp corner. There are no problems regarding
the different length of rise, run, tread and noising of the stair steps’ shape. The track-
based mechanisms are widely adopted.
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 (2) Wheel cluster-based mechanisms: A wheel cluster is a component with multiple wheels 4 of 37
uniformly distributed in the same plane around a common center. While using a
stair-climbing mechanism, the wheels rotate around the central axis of the wheel
cluster
climbingandmechanism,
propel the robot up or down
the wheels rotate the stairs.
around theOften, wheel
central axis cluster-based mech-
of the wheel cluster
anism robotsthe
and propel arerobot
not able
up ortodown
overcome all type
the stairs. of stair,
Often, wheel so cluster-based
a range of available
mechanismstep
lengths
robots areare not
given.
ableWheel cluster-based
to overcome robots
all type areso
of stair, characterized by speedstep
a range of available fluctuation
lengths
during the ascending
are given. and descending
Wheel cluster-based robotsmotion.
are characterized by speed fluctuation during
(3) Articulated
the ascending mechanism-based
and descending systems:
motion.This type of stair-climbing robots uses an articu-
(3) lated mechanism
Articulated in combination
mechanism-based with
systems: wheels
This typeto ofaccomplish
stair-climbingtherobots
stair-climbing task.
uses an articu-
(4) Hybrid and leg-based
lated mechanism mechanisms: This
in combination with type
wheels of tostair-climbing
accomplish the mechanism originates
stair-climbing task.
Hybrid
(4) from theand leg-based
imitation mechanisms:
of humans’ and This typestair-climbing
animals’ of stair-climbing mechanism
techniques, usingoriginates
legs and
from
feet tothe
walk imitation
on variousof humans’ and animals’
steps. Theoretically stair-climbing
they can adapt totechniques, using pro-
all type of stairs legs
and feet
vided thattothe
walk on various
control system steps. Theoretically
is sufficiently they can adapt to all type of stairs
developed.
provided that
(5) Wheel-based the control
mechanisms: system
Two or moreis sufficiently
wheels are developed.
used to perform the stair-climbing
Wheel-based
(5) task. mechanisms:
They can be suspended respect to the robot’sused
Two or more wheels are to perform
frame, the stair-climbing
using mechanical suspen-
task. They can be suspended respect to the robot’s frame,
sion, or not. Wheeled robots can reach high speeds with low power consumption.using mechanical suspen-
sion, or not. Wheeled robots can reach high speeds with low power consumption.
3. Payload Robots
3. Payload Robots
These types of vehicles are designed to carry a load during staircase negotiation. They
These
can be types
divided intoof wheelchair
vehicles aretypedesigned
(pleasetorefer
carryto aFigure
load during staircase
3a), where negotiation.
the person trans-
They can be divided into wheelchair type (please refer to Figure 3a),
ported is seen as a payload, or carrier type (see Figure 3b). Both families are described where the person in
transported is seen as a payload, or carrier type (see Figure 3b). Both families are described
detail in the remainder of this section.
in detail in the remainder of this section.
(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 3.
3.(a)
(a)Scewo
Scewowheelchair
wheelchair in in
action. Adapted
action. Adaptedwithwith
permission fromfrom
permission ref. [21].
ref. 2023
[21]. Preeta
2023 Preeta
Chatterjee
Chatterjee Sep 24, 2021; (b)
24 September Amoeba
2021; Go-1 inGo-1
(b) Amoeba action
in [22].
action [22].
3.1.
3.1. Wheelchair
Wheelchair Type
Type Robots
Since the
Since the 1990s,
1990s, many
many research
research results
results on
on wheelchair-type
wheelchair-type stair
stair climbing
climbing robots
robots have
have
been achieved
been achievedand andaavariety
varietyofofcommercial
commercial wheelchairs
wheelchairs andand prototypes
prototypes have
have been been de-
devel-
veloped
oped [23].[23].
Many Many examples
examples of wheelchair-type
of wheelchair-type stairs stairs havedemonstrated
have been been demonstrated at Cy-
at Cybathlon
bathlon
[24]. [24]. Cybathlon
Cybathlon is a non-profit
is a non-profit project project
of ETHofZurich
ETH Zurich (Zurich,
(Zurich, Germany)
Germany) whoas
who acts acts
a
as a platform
platform that challenges
that challenges teamsteams
fromfrom all over
all over the world
the world to develop
to develop assistive
assistive technolo-
technologies
gies suitable
suitable for everyday
for everyday use use with
with andand
forfor peoplewith
people withdisabilities.
disabilities.Different
Different disciplines
disciplines
comprise the competitions. They apply the most modern powered devices such as pros-
theses, wearable exoskeletons, wheelchairs and functional electrical stimulation, as well
as novel brain–computer interfaces to remove barriers between the public, people with
disabilities and science. In the Powered wheelchair race competition, the most modern
solutions compete with each other. Among the different tasks there is precisely that of
overcoming a small series of steps.
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 45

5 of 37
comprise
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW the competitions. They apply the most modern powered devices such as5 pros- of 43
theses, wearable exoskeletons, wheelchairs and functional electrical stimulation, as well
comprise the competitions. They apply the most modern powered
as novel brain–computer interfaces to remove barriers between the public, people with devices such as pros-
theses, wearable
disabilities exoskeletons, thewheelchairs and functional electrical stimulation, as well
comprise theand science.
competitions. In They Powered
apply the wheelchair
most modern race powered
competition, the such
devices most asmodern
pros-
as novel brain–computer interfaces to remove barriers between the public, peoplethat
with
Some examples of wheelchair type robots are now presented using classification
solutions
theses,
disabilities
overcoming
compete
wearable
anda
with each
exoskeletons,
science.
small In of
series
other. Among
wheelchairs
thesteps.
the
and different
functional tasks there
electrical is precisely
stimulation,
Powered wheelchair race competition, the most modern
of
as well
as novel brain–computer interfaces to remove barriers between the public, people with
solutions compete with each other. Among the different tasks there is precisely that of
shown in Figure 2. Track-based robots are reported in Table 1.
Some examples of wheelchair type robots are now presented
disabilities and science. In the Powered wheelchair race competition, the most modern
overcoming a small
shown in compete
Figure series of steps.
2.with
Track-based robots are reported in Table
using classification
1. there is precisely that of
solutions each other. Among the different tasks
overcoming a small series of steps.
shown in Figure 2. Track-based
Table 1. Track-based wheelchair type robots arelist.
robots reported in Table 1.
Table 1. Track-based wheelchair type robots list.
shown
Table 1. in
Name Figure 2. wheelchair
Track-based Track-based robots
type robotsare
list.reported in Table 1.
Solution Features
1
TableName
1. Track-based wheelchair type robots Solution
list. Features
Name Name Solution 1
Solution Features Features
Commercial solution,
automatic stair-
Scewo Bro [25] Commercial solution,
climbing system, self-
Scewo Bro [25]

balancing Commercial solution,
automaticsoftware
stair-
control, highstair-
automatic safety
automatic stair-climbing
balancing software
Scewo Bro [25] Scewo Bro [25] climbing system, self-
control, high safety
system, self-balancing
balancing software
control, high safety
software control, high safety
2
automatic stair-
TopChair-S
[26]
Commercial
Commercial Commercial solution,
solution,
solution,
automaticsoftware
balancing stair-
TopChair-S automatic stair-
TopChair-S climbingcontrolautomatic stair-climbing
system, self-
TopChair-S [26] [26]
[26]
balancing software
balancing software
control
control
software control
3

Prototype solution,
Prototype solution,
WT
WT manual
Prototype
Prototype solution, manual
manual stair-climb-
stair-climb-
solution,
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW Wheelchair ing system, no6 self-
of 45
WT Wheelchair [27,28] Wheelchair
WT
[27,28]
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW [27,28]
manual stair-climbing system, no
ing system, no self-
stair-climb-
balancing control
Wheelchair balancing
ing system, control
no 6 of 45
self-
[27,28]
4 self-balancing control system
system
system
balancing control
system
4
4
Prototype solution,
manual stair-climb-
Tao [29] ing system,solution,
Prototype self-bal-
ancing
manual software con-
stair-climb-
Prototype solution,
trol self-bal-
Tao [29] ing Prototype solution, manual
system,
manual stair-climb-
Tao [29] ancing software
ing system, con-
self-bal-
trol stair-climbing system,
Tao [29] ancing software con-
trol self-balancing
software control
5
5
5
automatic stair-
B-Free Ranger
[30]
climbing
Commercial Commercial solution,
system, self-
solution,
balancing software
automatic stair-
B-Free Ranger Commercial automatic stair-climbing
solution,
control
B-Free Ranger [30] [30]
climbing system,
automatic self-
stair-
B-Free Ranger balancing
climbing system, self-balancing
software
system, self-
[30] control
balancing software
control
software control
6
6
Prototype solution,
ZED evolution Prototype solution, manual

manual stair-climb-
ing system,solution,
Prototype no self-
ZED evolution [31] [31]
balancing
manual
stair-climbing system, no
control
stair-climb-
ZED
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW evolution Prototype solution,
systemno7self-
of 45
[31]
ing self-balancing control system
system,
manual stair-climb-
ZED evolution balancing control
ing system, no self-
[31] system
7 balancing control
system
Caterwil GTS5
automatic stair-
Lux [32] automatic stair-climbing
Caterwil GTS5 Lux [32] balancing software
control, high speed
software control, high speed
Prototype solution,
manual stair-climb-
Fortissimo [33] ing system, no self-
balancing control
system
7
7
automaticsolution,
Commercial stair-
Caterwil GTS5
climbing system,
automatic self-
stair-
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 Lux [32]
Caterwil GTS5 balancing software 6 of 37
Lux [32] control, high speed
balancing software
control, high speed
Table 1. Cont.
8
8
Name Solution Features
Prototype solution,
manual stair-climb-
Prototype solution,
Fortissimo [33] ing system,
manual no self-
stair-climb-
Fortissimo [33] Prototype solution, manual
ing system,control
balancing no self-
system
Fortissimo [33] balancingstair-climbing system, no
control
system
self-balancing control system
9
9
Prototype solution,
manual control,
Prototype no
solution,
Hkust [33]
Hkust [33] Hkust [33]
control, no self-balancing
self-balancing
manual control,control
no
system
self-balancing control
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW
control system
system 8 of 45
10
Prototype solution, automatic

Prototype solution,
All-Terrain
Wheelchair stair-climbing system,
automatic stair-
All-Terrain Wheelchair [34]. [34]. Adapted
self-balancing software
balancing software
Adapted with permission with permis-
control, Chebyshev-
sion ref. [34] control, Chebyshev-based
ref. [34] 2017 Janez Podobnik 2017 Janez
based linkage mecha-
Podobnik linkage mechanism for lifting

nism for lifting and
lowering the tracks
and lowering the tracks
Most of the solutions [25,26,29,30,33,34] use wheels as preferred locomotion mode on

Most of the solutions [25,26,29,30,33,34]
regular flat ground while the track-baseduse systemwheels
is stowed underasthepreferred
carriage. Obstacle locomotion mode on
negotiation is performed in track locomotion mode: the position of the tracks is changed
regular flat ground while the
so that they track-based
are lowered to the groundsystem
while wheelsis stowed
detach under
from the ground. Instead,the
in carriage. Obstacle
[27,30,33] a reconfigurable track-based system is proposed to prepare the robot to negoti-
negotiation is performedate instairs:track locomotion
in WT-Wheelchair mode:
internal linkages, the
positions are position
changed ofrearthe tracks is changed
while front and
flipper angulation are used in B-Free Ranger and Fortissimo. The wheelchair-type robots
so that they are loweredthatto the ground
participated in the Cybathlonwhile wheels
are: Scewo Bro detach
[25], B-Free Ranger from
[30], ZED evolutionthe ground. Instead,
[31], Caterwil GTS5 Lux [32], Fortissimo [33], Hkust [33], All-Terrain Wheelchair [34].
in [27,30,33] a reconfigurable track-based
The wheel system
cluster robots are reported is2.proposed to prepare the robot to negoti-
in Table
ate stairs: in WT-Wheelchair internal linkages, positions are changed while front and rear
flipper angulation are used in B-Free Ranger and Fortissimo. The wheelchair-type robots
that participated in the Cybathlon are: Scewo Bro [25], B-Free Ranger [30], ZED evolu-
tion [31], Caterwil GTS5 Lux [32], Fortissimo [33], Hkust [33], All-Terrain Wheelchair [34].
The wheel cluster robots are reported in Table 2.

Table 2. Wheel cluster-based wheelchair type robots list.
Table 2. Wheel cluster-based wheelchair type robots list.
Table 2.Name Solution

Wheel cluster-based wheelchair type robots list. Features
Name Name Solution
11
Commercial
automatic Commercial solution,
solu-
stair-climb-
iBOT 4000 ingtion, automatic
system, self-bal-
[35,36]
automatic stair-climbing
ancing softwaresys-
stair-climbing con-
iBOT 4000
iBOT 4000 [35,36] [35,36]
tem, system, self-balancing
trol,self-balancing
good driving
software control,
range
software control, good
good driving
range
driving range
12
Wheelchair.q
Wheelchair.q
[37,38].
[37,38]. Prototype solu-
Wheelchair.q [37,38]. Adapted Adapted
Adapted with
with Prototype solution, manual
Prototype
tion, manualsolution,
con-
permission
permission manual
with permission from ref. [37] trol, no control,
self-bal-no
from ref. [37]
from ref. [37] self-balancing
ancing controlcontrol
sys-
2017 Giuseppe Quaglia, 2017
2017
Giuseppe
system,
tem, good control system,
good perfor-
perfor-
Giuseppe mance
mance
Matteo Nisi Quaglia,
Quaglia, good performance
Matteo
MatteoNisiNisi
13
Castillo [39].
Adapted with Prototype solu-
permission
Castillo [39]. tion, manual con-
from ref [39]
Adapted with trol, self-balancing
2017 Basilio Prototype solution,
control system,
permission
Dobras Cas- manual control, self-
low comfort
from ref [39]
tilloBasilio balancing control sys-
2017
tem, low comfort
Dobras Cas-
tillo
Each solution has very different features from others. iBOT 4000 [35] has inverted
pendulum-type dynamic stability control to go up and down stairs while holding the seat
stable. Wheelchair.q [37] is composed of a pair of locomotion units and a retractable track
that guarantees the rear support point. Finally, Castillo [39], uses four X-shaped wheels to
12
Wheelchair.q
[37,38].
Adapted with Prototype solution,
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 permission manual control, no
7 of 37
from ref. [37] self-balancing control
2017 system, good perfor-
Giuseppe mance
Quaglia,
Matteo Nisi
Table 2. Cont.
Name Solution
13 Features
Castillo [39].
Adapted with
Prototype solution,
Castillo [39]. Adapted with permission Prototype solution, manual
manual control, self-
from ref [39]
permission from ref [39] 2017 2017 Basilio control, self-balancing control
balancing control sys-
tem, low comfort
Basilio Dobras Castillo Dobras Cas-
tillo
system, low comfort
Each solution has very different features from others. iBOT 4000 [35] has inverted
pendulum-type dynamic stability control to go up and down stairs while holding the seat
Each solution has very different
stable. Wheelchair.q features
[37] is composed of a pairfrom others.
of locomotion iBOT track
units and a retractable 4000 [35] has inverted
pendulum-type dynamicthat climb
guarantees the rear support point. Finally, Castillo [39], uses four X-shaped wheels to
stability control
and descend stairs while theto
seat go
angle up
of the and down
wheelchair stairs
can be changed while holding the seat
to hold
stable. Wheelchair.q [37]the center of gravity close to the center of the supporting polygon. Hybrid and leg-based
is composed
robots are reported in Table 3. of a pair of locomotion units and a retractable track
that guarantees the rear support point. Finally, Castillo [39], uses four X-shaped wheels
to climb and descend stairs while the seat angle of the wheelchair can be changed to hold
the center of gravity close to the center of the supporting polygon. Hybrid and leg-based
robots are reported
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEERin Table
REVIEW 3.
Table 3. Hybrid and leg-based wheelchair type robots list.
10 of 45

Table 3. Hybrid and leg-based wheelchair type 14
robots list.
Table 3. Hybrid and leg-based wheelchair type robots list.
Table 3.Name
Hybrid and leg-based wheelchair Solution
type robots list. Features
14
Name Wang [40].
Solution
14 Features
Adapted with per- Prototype solution,
mission from ref manula stair-climbing
Wang [40].
[40] 2014 Hongbo system
Wang
Wang[40].
mission from ref manula stair-climbing
Wang [40]. Adapted with Adapted with per-
[40] 2014 Hongbo
Prototype solution,
system
mission from ref Prototype solution, manula
manula stair-climbing
permission from ref [40] 2014 Wang
[40] 2014 Hongbo system
Wang
stair-climbing system
Hongbo Wang
15
15
15
Zero Carrier
[41,42]. Adapted Prototype solution,
with permission automatic stair-climb-
Zero Carrier
Zero Carrier [41,42]. Adapted from ref. [41] 2004
[41,42]. Adapted Prototype solution, automatic
ing system, low speed
Prototype solution,
Zero Carrier
Jianjun Yuan
with permission from ref. [41] with permission
[41,42]. Adapted
from ref. [41] 2004
stair-climbing system,
automatic stair-climb-
Prototype solution,
with permission automatic stair-climb-
2004 Jianjun Yuan Jianjun Yuan
from ref. [41] 2004
low speed
Jianjun Yuan
16
16
16
JWCR-1 [43,44].
JWCR-1 [43,44]. AdaptedAdapted
withwith per- Prototype solution,
permission from ref. [44]JWCR-1
2007from
mission ref.
[43,44].
manual control, low
[44] 2007 Jiaoyan
Adapted with per-
safety control, low safety
Prototype solution,
Jiaoyan Tang mission
JWCR-1
Tang[43,44].
from ref. manual control, low
[44] 2007 Jiaoyan safety
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEWmission
from ref. manual control,11 low
of 45
Tang
[44] 2007 Jiaoyan safety
Tang
WL-16 II [45,46].
Adapted with per-
17 Prototype solution,
mission from ref.
WL-16 II [45,46]. manual control
[45] 2006 Y. Sug-
WL-16 II [45,46]. Adapted Adapted with per-
WL-16 II [45,46]. 17 Prototype solution,
ahara
mission from ref. Prototype solution,
with permission from ref. [45] Adapted with per-
[45] 2006 Y. Sug- 17
manual control
Prototype solution,
mission from ref. manual control
2006 Y. Sugahara ahara
[45] 2006 Y. Sug-
manual control
ahara
Wang [40] and Zero Carrier [41,42] have chain-driven legs that move vertically and
wheels at the end of each leg. Some are driven to provide forward locomotion while other
Wang [40] and Zero Carrier
are passive [41,42]
wheels. Lee wheelchair have chain-driven
[47] (not shown legs
in Table 3) climbs stairs that
using the two move vertically and
3-DOF legs with boomerang-shaped feet. The leg mechanisms are folded into the compact
wheels at the end of each leg.body
wheelchair Some when theare driven
wheelchair to flat
moves over provide forward
surfaces. JWCR-1 locomotion while other
[43,44] and WL-
16 II [45] simulate humanoid walking to going up and down stairs. The first uses 12-DOF
are passive wheels. Leemechanism
wheelchair [47] (not shown in Table 3) climbs
to replicate a human leg while the second has 6-DOF parallel mechanism for stairs using the two
each leg. Articulated Mechanism-based robots are reported in Table 4.
Table 4. Articulated mechanism-based wheelchair type robots list.
wheelchair body when the wheelchair
Name
moves over flat surfaces.
Solution
JWCR-1 [43,44] and WL-16
Features
II [45] simulate humanoid walking to going18 up and down stairs. The first uses 12-DOF
Prototype solution, au-

RT-Mover PType tomatic stair-climbing
WA [48–50] system, self-balancing
software control
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 8 of 37
are passive wheels. Lee wheelchair [47] (not shown in Table 3) climbs stairs using the two
mechanism to replicate a human leg while the second has 6-DOF parallel mechanism for
are passive wheels. Lee wheelchair [47] (not shown in Table 3) climbs stairs using the two
wheelchair body when the wheelchair moves over flat surfaces. JWCR-1 [43,44] and WL-
wheelchair body when the wheelchair moves over flat surfaces. JWCR-1 [43,44] and WL-
Table 4.Name
Articulated mechanism-based wheelchair
Solution type robots list. Features
18
Name Solution
18 Features

RT-Mover PType Prototype solution, automatic
tomatic stair-climbing
WA [48–50] system, self-balancing
RT-Mover PType tomatic stair-climbing
software control
RT-Mover PType WA [48–50] WA [48–50] system, self-balancing
software controlself-balancing
software control
19
19

Morales [51] stair-climbing system,
Morales [51]
software control,
12 low
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW Morales [51] self-balancing software
of 45
speed 12 of 45
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW software control, low
20 speed control, low speed
20
20
Lawn [52]. Adapted Prototype solution, au-

with[52].
Lawn permission
Adapted tomatic stair-climbing
from ref.
with[52].
Lawn [52] 2003
permission
Adapted system, Prototype solution, automatic
tomatic self-balancing
stair-climbing
Lawn [52]. Adapted with fromM.J.
ref.Lawn
[52] 2003
with permission software
system,
control
self-balancing
permission from ref. [52] 2003 fromM.J.
ref.Lawn
[52] 2003 software
system, control
self-balancing
M.J. Lawn software control self-balancing
M.J. Lawn
software control
21
21
21
TBW-I [53].
Prototype solution,
Adapted
TBW-Iwith
[53].per-
manual control,
Prototype no
solution,
TBW-I [53]. Adapted with mission
TBW-Ifrom
Adapted [53].ref.
with per- Prototype solution, manual
self-balancing
manual control,
Prototype control
no
solution,
[53] 2010
mission Yusuke
from
Adapted with per-ref.
permission from ref. [53] 2010 [53]Sugahara
2010from
mission Yusuke
ref.
system
self-balancing
manual control, no self-balancing
control
control, no
systemcontrol
self-balancing
Yusuke Sugahara [53] Sugahara
2010 Yusuke
system control system
Sugahara
22
22
22
HELIOS-V [54]. Prototype solution,

HELIOS-V [54]. AdaptedAdapted withwith[54].
HELIOS-V per-
manual control,
Prototype no
solution,
permission from ref. [54]Adapted 1999from
mission
HELIOS-V with ref.
per-
[54]. self-balancingcontrol, no self-balancing
manual control,
Prototype control
no
solution,
[54] 1999 Y.
mission
Adapted Uchida
from
with ref.
per- system
self-balancing
manual control
control, no
Y.2023,Uchida
Robotics [54]
12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 1999 from
mission Y. Uchida
ref. self-balancing control system
systemcontrol
13 of 45
[54] 1999 Y. Uchida system 13 of 45
23
23
23
Chen [55]. Adapted withChen [55]. Adapted
with[55].
Chen permission
Adapted
Prototype solution,
permission from ref. [55]Chen
2012 manual control,
Prototype no
solution,
from ref.
with[55]. [55] 2012
permission
Adapted
self-balancingcontrol, no self-balancing
control
manual control,
Prototype no
solution,
Chun-Ta Chen, with permission
Chun-Ta
from ref.Chen,
[55] Ho-
2012
ang-Vuong
Chun-Ta
from [55]Pham
ref. Chen, Ho-
2012
system,
manuallow control system, low stability
stability
control, no
Hoang-Vuong PhamChun-Ta
ang-Vuong Pham
Chen, Ho-
system, low stability
system, low stability
ang-Vuong Pham
24
24
Prototype solution,
Prototype
manual
solution,
control, no
RPWheel [56] manual control, no
RPWheel [56] RPWheel [56] self-balancing
self-balancing
control
system control
In general, they use a wheel or wheels mounted on a structure whose position

In general,
changes theyclimbing.
during stair use a wheel
Chen or
[55]wheels mounted
and TBW-I onsimple
[53] use a structure whose
rotation position
to change the
In general, they useshape
adevice
changes
shape
the
wheel
of during
of the
or wheels
stair climbing.
the mechanism,
mechanism,
and a secondary
Morales
Morales
Chen
mechanism
mounted
[51][55]
and
[51] and
and
Lawn
to Lawn
TBW-I
[52][53]
place the
on
useuse a structure
simple rotation
deployable
[52]wheels
use deployable
to change
rigid supports
rigid
on the new supports
support
to whose
the
lift
to lift
surface.
position changes
during stair climbing. Chen
the device
Finally, [55]PType
RT-Mover
Finally,areRT-Mover
andWATBW-I
and a secondary
PType WA mechanism
[48] has two [53] use
toleg-like
place the wheels
axle simple
on theand
mechanism rotation
newa support
seat surface.
slider. Four to change the shape
wheels mounted at the leg[48]
tips.has two leg-like
Every leg-like axle mechanism
mechanism and a seat
possesses two slider.
shafts:Four
one
of the mechanism, Moraleswheels
for are[51]
mounted
roll adjustments andat the
and Lawn
oneleg
fortips. Every[52]
steering leg-likeuse
adjustment. deployable
mechanism
RT-Mover possesses
PType WA
for roll adjustments and one for steering adjustment. RT-Mover PType WA [48–50] and
two[48–50]rigid
shafts: one
and supports to lift the
RPWheel [56] wheelchair type robots participated at the 2020 Cybathlon edition.
RPWheel [56] wheelchair type robots participated at the 2020 Cybathlon edition.
3.2. Carrier Type Robots
One goal of robotics is to replace human operators in daily tasks. Mobile robots for
goodsOne goal of
delivery robotics an
represent is to replace human
important operators
application area. in
Thedaily tasks. Mobile
challenge robots
that these for
robots
goodsface
must delivery represent
is to climb an of
a flight important
stairs (upapplication
and down)area.
of aThe challenge
building that athese
carrying load.robots
With
must facetois the
reference to climb a flight proposed
classification of stairs (up and down)
in Section of a building
2, examples carrying astair-climb-
of carrier-type load. With
reference
ing to will
vehicles the classification
be introducedproposed in Section 2, examples of carrier-type stair-climb-
and discussed.
ing vehicles will be
Track-based introduced
robots and discussed.
are reported in Table 5.
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 9 of 37
device and a secondary mechanism to place the wheels on the new support surface. Finally,
RT-Mover PType WA [48] has two leg-like axle mechanism and a seat slider. Four wheels
are mounted at the leg tips. Every leg-like mechanism possesses two shafts: one for roll ad-
justments and one for steering adjustment. RT-Mover PType WA [48–50] and RPWheel [56]
wheelchair type robots participated at the 2020 Cybathlon edition.

One goal of robotics is to replace human operators in daily tasks. Mobile robots for
goods delivery represent an important application area. The challenge that these robots
must face is to climb a flight of stairs (up and down) of a building carrying a load. With
reference to the classification proposed in Section 2, examples of carrier-type stair-climbing
vehicles will be introduced and discussed.
Track-based robots are reported in Table 5.
Table 5. Track-based carrier

Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW type robots list. 14 of 45
25
25
Name Solution
25 Features
tonomous driving,
tonomous driving,
Zhang [57,58]
Zhang [57,58]
Prototype
self-balancing Prototype solution,
solution, au-
control
tonomous driving,
system, small dimen-
Zhang [57,58] self-balancingautonomous driving,
sions control
Zhang [57,58] sions
self-balancing control system,
sions
small dimensions
26
26
26
autonomous driving,
autonomous driving,
Amoeba Go-1 [22] Commercial solution,
Amoeba Go-1 [22] autonomous driving,
autonomous
system, soft driving,
Amoeba Go-1 [22] Amoeba Go-1 [22] rubber
system, soft rubber
self-balancing
tracks control
tracks
system, soft rubber
tracks soft rubber tracks
27
27
27

Prototype solution,
Prototype solution,
manual control, no
manual control, no
Yoneda [59]
Yoneda [59]
Yoneda [59] control, no self-balancing
Prototype solution,
15 of 45
manual control, no
system
Yoneda [59] system control system
15 of 45
system
28
28
TAQT Carrier [60].

Prototype solution,
Adapted with per-
TAQT Carrier [60]. Adapted
TAQT Carrier [60].
mission from ref.
Prototype solution,
Adapted with per- Prototype solution, manual
balancing system
with permission from ref.[60]
[60]
1992 S. Hirose
mission from ref.
control, self-balancing system
balancing system
1992 S. Hirose [60] 1992 S. Hirose
29
29
Prototype solution,
manual control, no
HELIOS-VI [61] Prototype solution,
HELIOS-VI [61] control, no self-balancing
manual control, no
HELIOS-VI [61] system
control system
system
30
30
autonomous driving,
Haulerbot [62] self-balancing control
autonomous driving,
system, high payload
Haulerbot [62] self-balancing control
capacity
system, high payload
capacity
31
31
iRobt 710 Kobra autonomous driving,
[63] self-balancing control
[60] 1992 S. Hirose
29
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 10 of 37

Prototype solution,
manual control, no
HELIOS-VI [61]
system
Table 5. Cont.
Name Solution
30 Features
autonomous driving,
Haulerbot [62] autonomous driving,
Haulerbot [62] system, high payload
capacity 16 of 45
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW high
16 of 45 payload capacity
31
iRobt 710 Kobra autonomous driving,
iRobt 710 Kobra [63] [63] autonomous driving,
system
32 self-balancing control system
32
32
Prototype solution,
Prototype solution,
manual
manual control,
control,
Prototype
no
no
solution, manual
Polibot [64] Polibot [64] Prototype solution,
Polibot [64] self-balancing
manual control, no control
Polibot [64] system
system
system
control system
Solutions that adopt a reconfigurable track-based are: [65] (not shown in Table 5), [66]
(not shown in Table 5) and [61], [57], [67] (not shown in Table 5) and [60,62,63] feature
front and rear moving flippers. Amoeba Go-1 [22] does not use a traditional track, while
(not shown in Table 5) and [61], [57], [67] (not shown in Table 5) and [60,62,63] feature
it is equipped with a pair of soft crawlers in place of a classic track with grousers. Finally,
front and rear moving flippers. Amoeba Go-1 [22] does not use a traditional track, while
(not shown in Table
Solutions that5) anda reconfigurable
adopt [57,61,67] (not shownare:
track-based in [65]
Table(not5) and in[60,62,63]
Polibot [64] refers to an example of suspended tracked robot where the ground wheels
shown feature front
Table 5), [66]
it is equipped with a pair of soft crawlers in place of a classic track with grousers. Finally,
can move with respect to the chassis using independent swing arms, showing remarkable
Polibot [64] refers to an example of suspended tracked robot where the ground wheels
and rear
(notmoving
shown inflippers.
Table 5) and Amoeba
[61], [57],Go-1 [67] (not [22]shown doesinnot use5) aand
Table traditional track, while it is
[60,62,63] feature
mobility over challenging environments that include staircases. A wheel cluster-based ro-
can move with respect to the chassis using independent swing arms, showing remarkable
bot is reported in Table 6.
mobility over challenging environments that include staircases. A wheel cluster-based ro-
equipped
front with a pair
and rear movingof flippers.
soft crawlers Amoeba Go-1 in place
bot is reported in Table 6.
[22] does of anot
classic track with
use a traditional grousers.
track, while Finally,
Polibotit is
[64]equipped
referswith a Table
to an pair 6. Wheel cluster-based carrier type robots list.
of soft crawlers
example of in place of atracked
suspended classic track
robotwithwheregrousers. Finally,
the ground wheels
Table 6.Name
Wheel cluster-based carrier type robots list.
Solution Features
Polibot [64] refers to an example of suspended33 tracked robot where the ground wheels
can move with respect to the Namechassis usingSolution
can move with respect to the chassis using independent
independent swing
swing
arms,
arms, showing remarkable
Features
showing remarkable
33
mobility over challenging environments that include
mobility over challenging environments that include staircases. A wheel cluster-based staircases. A wheel ro- cluster-based
robot isbotreported
is reportedininTable
Table 6. 6. Prototype solution,
manual control,
Prototype no
solution,
Deshmukh [68]
Table 6. Wheel cluster-based carrier type robots list. manual control, no
Table 6. Wheel cluster-based carrier type robots list.
Deshmukh [68] system
system
Name Solution
33 Features
Prototype solution,
Prototype
manual solution,
control, no manual
Deshmukh [68]
Deshmukh [68] control, no
self-balancing self-balancing
control
control system
system
It has four wheel-cluster units to perform the stair climbing task [68]. To hold the
payload horizontally, a simple mechanism is used to raise and lower the platform. Hybrid
and leg-based robots are reported in Table 7.
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 11 of 37
Table 7. Hybrid and leg-based carrier type robots list.

Table 7.Name
Hybrid and Solution
leg-based carrier type robots list. Features
Table 7. Hybrid and leg-based carrier type robots list.
Name Solution 34 Features
Name Solution
34 Features

tonomoussolution,
Prototype driving, au-
au-
Wen [69] Prototype solution,
tonomous driving, au-
Wen [69] autonomous
system driving,
Wen [69] tomatic stair-climbing
automatic
system
35
35

PEOPLER-II tonomous
Prototype
Prototype solution,
driving, au-
solution, no
PEOPLER-II [70,71]
[70,71]
PEOPLER-II autonomous
self-balancing driving,
control
tonomous driving, no no
[70,71] self-balancing control system
systemcontrol
self-balancing
system
Wen [69] has driven legs which move vertically, and four wheels attached to the body
Wenframes. [69] Moreover,
has driven legs which move vertically, and four wheels attached to the
[72] (not shown in Table 7) uses driven legs as Wen [69] but a different
Wen [69] has driven legs which move vertically, and four wheels attached to the body
body frames.
system to Moreover,
appreciate stairs [72]corners.
(not shown Peopler-II in[70,71]
Tablehas 7)perpendicularly
uses driven oriented legs asplane-Wen [69] but a
frames. Moreover, [72] (not shown in Table 7) uses driven legs as Wen [69] but a different
differentsystem
system
tary legged towheels
appreciate
to appreciate
that are stairs
used corners.
stairs corners. Peopler-IIPeopler-II
to climb and [70,71]
descend stairs.
[70,71] has perpendicularly has perpendicularly
Finally, Yeping [73] (not
oriented plane- oriented
planetary shownlegged in Table 7) is athat four-legged stair-climbing robot.descend
Each leg has 4-DoFFinally,
and support a
tary leggedwheels wheels that are are used
used to climb
to climb and
and descend stairs.
stairs. Finally, Yeping [73]Yeping(not [73] (not
roller at their own end. An articulated mechanism-based robot is reported in [74]. It uses
shown in shownTable in 7) Tableis a7) four-legged
is a four-leggedstair-climbing
stair-climbing robot. Each Each
robot. leg hasleg 4-DoF hasand support
4-DoF a support a
and
roller
Robotics 2023,at
12, xtheir
FOR PEERown
REVIEW end. An articulated mechanism-based robot is reported 18 of 45in [74]. It uses
roller at Robotics
their 2023, own end.
12, x FOR PEER REVIEWAn articulated mechanism-based robot is 18 ofreported
45 in [74]. It uses
deployable rigid supports to lift the device and a secondary mechanism
deployable rigid supports to lift the device and a secondary mechanism for placing the
for placing the
deployable
on therigid
newsupports to lift the device
front and a secondary mechanism for placing the
wheels on the new support wheels
surface. The
support surface.
front
The
wheels
wheels
can
can change
change
shape to paws.
wheels on the new support surface. The front wheels can change shape to paws. shape to paws.
3.3. No Payload Robots
3.3. No Payload Robots
This type of robot has been designed without foreseeing any payload capacity. They
3.3. No Payload Robots usually This type of
employ robot
less has been systems
complicated designedtowithout
performforeseeing
the ascentany
andpayload
descentcapacity. They
of the flight
ofusually employ less
stairs. Referring complicated
to Figure systemsrobots
2, no payload to perform
can bethe ascent andbased
categorized descent of the
on the flight
specific
This type of robot has been designed without foreseeing any payload capacity. They
of stairs.
climbing
Referring
mechanism.
to Figure 2,
It should
no payload robots
be notedbiped,
that the
can be categorized
hybrid and
based
climbing mechanism. It should be noted that the hybrid and leg-based platforms can beon the specific
further divided into three subcategories: quadruped andleg-based
hexapod.platforms can be
usually employ less complicated systems to perform the ascent and descent of the flight of
further divided into
Track-based three
robots aresubcategories: biped,
reported in Table
8. quadruped and hexapod.
stairs. Referring to Figure 2, no payload robots can be categorized based on the specific
climbing mechanism. It should be noted that the hybrid and leg-based platforms can be
further divided into three subcategories: biped, quadruped and hexapod.
Table 8. Track-based robots

Table list.
8. Track-based robots list.
Table 8. Track-based robots list.
Name 36Solution Features
Name Solution
36 Features
ROBHAZ-DT3 [75].
ROBHAZ-DT3
Adapted [75].
with per-
ROBHAZ-DT3 [75]. AdaptedAdaptedfrom
withref.
per- Prototype solution,
mission Prototype solution,
Prototype solution,
teleoperated control
with permission from ref. [75]
mission
[75] 2004 from
Woosubref.
[75] 2004
LeeWoosub teleoperated control
2004 Woosub Lee Lee
Variable configuration
Variable configura-
Variable configura-
articulated tracked vehicle
tion articulated
tion articulated
Prototype solution,
Prototype solution,
tracked vehicle [76]. Prototype solution,
[76]. Adapted withAdapted
tracked vehicle [76].
with per-
teleoperated teleoperated control,
control,
self-balancing control,
Adaptedfrom withref.
per-
permission from ref. [76]mission
2007
mission from
[76] 2007 Pinhas ref. self-balancing control system
self-balancing
system control
system
Pinhas Ben-Tzvi [76]Ben-Tzvi
2007 Pinhas
Ben-Tzvi
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 12 of 37
Table 8. Cont.

Prototype solution,
MACbot [77] automatic stair-
Prototype
Prototype Prototype solution, automatic
solution,
climbingsolution,
system
MACbot [77] MACbot [77] automatic stair-
MACbot [77]
automatic stair-
climbing system
climbing system
Prototype solution,
Silver [78]. Adapted Prototype Prototype solution, mobile

mobile rescue robot
solution,
Prototype
automaticsolution,
Silver [78]. Adapted with with[78].
permission mobile rescuestair-
rescue robot automatic
robot
Silver Adapted mobile
climbing rescue robot
Silver
from [78]. [78]
Adapted automatic stair-tel-
system,
with ref. 2006
permission from ref. [78] 2006 with
S.
permission
permission
Ali A.
from ref.Moosavian
[78] 2006
automaticcontrol,
eoperated
climbing
stair-
system, tel-
climbing system,
self-balancing tel-
control
from ref. [78] 2006 eoperated control,
S. Ali A. Moosavian S. Ali A. Moosavian
S. Ali A. Moosavian
eoperated
self-balancing
teleoperated control,
control,
systemcontrol
self-balancing control system
system
system
40
40
40
Azimut [79].
Prototype solution,
Azimut [79]. Adapted with
Adapted
Azimutwith [79].per- Prototype solution, flat
flat diamond-shape
Azimutfrom
mission [79].ref. Prototype solution,
Adapted with per-
permission from ref. [79]Adapted
2003
[79] withF.
2003 per-
mission from ref.
Prototype
tracks,
flat diamond-shape tracks, local
solution,
local percep-
diamond-shape
flat diamond-shape
mission from ref. tion
tracks, system
local percep-
F. Michaud Michaud
[79] 2003 F.
[79] 2003 F.
perception system
tracks, local percep-
tion system
Michaud tion system
Michaud
All solutions use reconfigurable track-system to negotiate stairs. The Robhaz-dt3 [75]
trackAll
is divided
solutionsinto
usetwo parts that can
reconfigurable rotate one with
track-system respect stairs.
to negotiate to the other. Reference [75]
The Robhaz-dt3 [76]
All solutions use reconfigurable
trackAll
changes solutions
internalinto
is divided usetwo
linkages track-system
reconfigurable
positions
parts track-system
to
that can modify to
thewith
rotate one track to negotiate
negotiate
shape.
respect stairs.
the The
Finally,
to [77–79]
other. stairs.
Robhaz-dt3
have
Reference [75]
front
[76] The Robhaz-dt3 [75]
track is divided
and rear
changes moving
internal into two parts
flippers
linkages that can
to perform
positions rotate
to the one
stair
modify with
trackrespect
climbing
the to the other. Reference
task. Wheel-cluster-based
shape. Finally, [77–79] [76]
haverobots
front
track is divided into two
changes
are partsinternal
reported in that
linkages
Table 9. can rotate
positions to modify one
the track with
shape. respect
Finally,
and rear moving flippers to perform the stair climbing task. Wheel-cluster-based robots [77–79] to
have the
front other. Reference [76]
and rear moving
are reported flippers
in Table 9. to perform the stair climbing task. Wheel-cluster-based robots
changes internal linkages positions to modify the track shape. Finally, [77–79] have front
Table
are 9. Wheel
reported in cluster-based
Table 9. robots list.
Table 9. Name
Wheel cluster-based robots list. Solution Features
and rear moving flippersTableto9. Wheel
Name
perform thelist.stair
cluster-based robots climbing task. Wheel-cluster-based
Solution Features
robots are
reported in Table 9.
Robotics 2023,
Robotics 2023, 12,
12, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 20 of
20 of 45
45

Table 9. Wheel cluster-based robots list.
41
41
Name Solution
41 Features
The Tri-Wheel
The Tri-Wheel
[80,81].
[80,81]. Adapted
Adapted
The Tri-Wheel
The Tri-Wheel [80,81].
with
with permission
permission
[80,81]. Adapted Prototype solution
Prototype solution
Adapted with permission
from
from ref.
withref. [81] 2015
[81]
permission2015 Prototype solution
Lauren
Lauren M.
ref.M. Smith
Smith Prototype solution
from ref. [81] 2015from
Lauren [81] 2015
Lauren M. Smith
M. Smith
42
42
42
Prototype solution,
Prototype solution,
Prototype
mobile
mobile rescue
rescue
Prototype robot, solution, mobile
robot,
solution,
Asguard [82,83]
Asguard [82,83]
Asguard [82,83] motion
motion rescue
control
control
mobile rescue soft-robot, motion
soft-
robot,
Asguard [82,83] ware
motionware
control soft-
control software
ware
Prototype
Prototype solution,
Prototype solution, segmented
solution,
Krys [84,85] Krys [84,85]
Krys [84,85] segmented
segmented
Prototype solution,
stair-climbing
stair-climbing
stair-climbing wheels
wheels
wheels
44
44
44
Looper [86].
Looper [86].
Adapted
Adapted
Looper with
with per-
per-
[86].
mission from
mission
Adapted from ref.
with ref.
per- Prototype solution
Prototype solution
[86]
[86] 2008from
2008
mission Sam ref.
Sam D.
D. Prototype solution
Herbert
[86] Herbert
2008 Sam D.
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 Prototype solution,
13 of 37
Table 9. Cont.
Name Solution
44 Features
Looper [86].
Adapted
Looper [86]. Adapted with per-
with
mission from ref. Prototype solution
permission from ref.[86]
[86] 2008
2008 Sam D. Prototype solution
Sam D. Herbert Herbert
Most of the solutions [80–82,86] use rotating wheels to perform stair climbing. The
Tri-Wheel [80,81] has two locomotion units at the front of the robot,
Asguard [82,83] and
Looper [86]
Robotics
four.
Robotics2023,
2023, 12,xxFOR
12,
Krys
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW [84,85] possess special wheels for movement 21 of
21 of 45
45 on stairs: its rotary
segments are capable of smooth driving
Most of the solutions [80,81], on
[81,82]stairs
and [86] usewithout
rotating wheels oscillation
to perform stair of the chassis center
climbing.
MostThe Tri-Wheel [80,81] has[81,82]
two locomotion units at thewheels
front oftothe robot, stair
As-
of mass. Articulated mechanism-based guardMost of the
of
[82,83]
climbing.
the
Theand
solutions
solutions
Looper [86]
Tri-Wheel
robots
[80,81],
[80,81],
four.
[80,81] has
[81,82]
Krys are
and [86]
and
two[84,85]
reported
[86] use
use
possess
locomotion
rotating
rotating
special
units
in
wheelsfor
wheels
at the
Table
perform
to perform
front of movement on10.
stair
the robot, As-
climbing.
stairs: The Tri-Wheel [80,81] has two locomotion unitsonatstairs
the front of the robot, As-
guardits
guard
rotary
[82,83]
[82,83] and
and
segments
Looper
are capable
Looper [86]
[86] four.
of smooth
four. Krys
Krys [84,85]
driving
[84,85] possess
possess special
special
without
wheels
wheels
oscillation
for movement
for movement of
on
on
the chassis
stairs: its center
rotary of mass. Articulated
segments are capable mechanism-based
of smooth driving robots
on are
stairs reported
without in Table 10.
oscillation of
stairs: its rotary segments are capable of smooth driving on stairs without oscillation of
Table 10. Articulated mechanism-based the robotsrobots
the chassis
Table 10. Articulated mechanism-based list.
chassis center
center of
list.
of mass.
mass.Articulated
Articulatedmechanism-based
mechanism-based robots
robots are
are reported
reported in
in Table
Table 10.
10.
Table10.
Table 10.Articulated
Articulatedmechanism-based
Name mechanism-basedrobots
robots list.
Solution
list. Features
Name Name
Name Solution
Solution
Solution Features
Features Features
TuskBot [87].
Prototype solution,
Adapted with
TuskBot [87].
[87].
TuskBot indoor operations,
Prototype solution,
TuskBot [87]. Adapted with
permission
Adapted with
Adapted
from
with Prototype Prototype solution,
solution,
length-adaptable
indoor operations,
ref. [87] 2017
permission from indoor operations,
permission from ref. [87]permission
2017
Jonghun
ref. [87]
from
Choe
[87] 2017
2017
platform indoor operations,
length-adaptable
length-adaptable
ref. platform
platform
Jonghun Choe JonghunJonghun Choe Choe length-adaptable platform
Rocker-Bogie [88].
Rocker-Bogie [88]. Adapted
Adapted with
Rocker-Bogie
Rocker-Bogie [88].
[88].
permission
Adapted with from
with
with permission from ref.permission
[88]
Adapted
ref. [88] 2012
Prototype solution,
permission from from Prototype solution, automatic
automaticsolution,
Prototype stair-
2012 Dongmok Kim,Heeseung
Dongmok
ref. [88]
ref.
Kim,
[88] 2012
2012 Prototype
climbing
solution,
system
DongmokHong,
Dongmok Kim,
Kim,
automatic
automatic stair-climbing system
stair-
stair-
Heeseung Hong, Hwa Heeseung
Soo
Hwa Soo Kim,
Heeseung Hong,
Hong,
climbing system
climbing system
Jongwon Kim
Kim, Jongwon Kim Hwa Hwa Soo Soo Kim,
Jongwon Kim
Kim,
Jongwon Kim
Rocker-Pillar [89].
Rocker-Pillar [89]. Adapted Adapted with Prototype solution,
Rocker-Pillar
Rocker-Pillar [89].
[89]. Prototype solution, automatic
with permission from
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR ref.permission
PEER REVIEW [89] with
Adapted
Adapted
from
with automaticsolution,
Prototype
Prototype
stair-
22 of 45
solution,
ref. [89] 2012
permission from from climbing stair-climbing system
system
automatic stair-
2012 Dongkyu Choipermission Dongkyu
ref. [89]
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW ref.
Choi
[89] 2012
2012
automatic stair-
climbing system
climbing system
22 of 45
Dongkyu Choi
Dongkyu Choi
Prototype solution,
Octopus [90] automaticsolution,
stair-
Prototype
Prototype
climbing
solution,
system
Octopus [90] Octopus [90]
Octopus [90] automatic
automatic stair-
stair-
climbing stair-climbing system
climbing system
system
Prototype solution,
Prototype solution, all-terrain
all-terrain mobile ro-
WheTLHLoc [91]
WheTLHLoc [91] bot, mobile robot, automatic
automatic
Prototype stair-
solution,
climbingmobile
all-terrain systemro-
WheTLHLoc [91] stair-climbing system
bot, automatic stair-
climbing system
Mantis [92].
Adapted with
Prototype solution,
permission from
Mantis [92]. teleoperated control
ref.Adapted
[92] 2014with
Luca
Bruzzonefrom Prototype solution,
permission
ref. [92] 2014 Luca
Bruzzone
They present very different systems to perform the stair-climbing task. Mabuchi [93]
(not shown in table 10) has arms to hook onto the tread of stairs. TuskBot [87] has rear
assistive track mechanisms to accommodate stairs and front a protruded structure to
climb the stair. Rocker-Bogie [88] and Rocker-Pillar [89] derive their structures from strong
(not shown in table 10) has arms to hook onto the tread of stairs. TuskBot [87] has rear
mobility in an unexpected terrain vehicle. Octopus [90] has many parallel suspension ar-
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 14 of 37
Prototype solution,
all-terrain mobile ro-
WheTLHLoc [91]
bot, automatic stair-
Table 10. Cont. climbing system
Mantis [92]. Adapted with Mantis [92].

Adapted with Prototype solution,
permission from ref. [92]permission
2014 from Prototype solution,
Luca Bruzzone ref. [92] 2014 Luca
Bruzzone
They present very (not shown in table 10) has arms to hook onto the tread of stairs. TuskBot [87] has rear
different
assistive systems
track mechanisms to perform
to accommodate thea protruded
stairs and front stair-climbing
structure to task. Mabuchi [93]
climb the stair. Rocker-Bogie [88] and Rocker-Pillar [89] derive their structures from strong
(not shown in Table 10)mobility
hasin arms toterrain
an unexpected hook onto
vehicle. Octopusthe tread
[90] has of suspension
many parallel stairs.ar-TuskBot [87] has rear
chitectures that lead to a very smooth slope of the center of gravity when overcoming
assistive track mechanismsvertical to accommodate
slopes. Finally, WheTLHLoc [91]stairs
and Mantis and front
[92] are a protruded
characterized by a main structure to climb
the stair. Rocker-Bogiebody
stairs.
equipped with actuated wheels and two protruded structures to allow for climbing
[88] and
The biped typesRocker-Pillar [89]
of hybrid and leg-based robots derive
are reported in Tabletheir
11. structures from strong
mobility in an unexpected terrain vehicle. Octopus [90] has many parallel suspension
architectures that lead to a very smooth slope of the center of gravity when overcoming
Robotics
Robotics 2023,
2023,12,
12,xx FOR
FOR PEER
vertical
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW
slopes. Finally, WheTLHLoc [91] and Mantis [92] are characterized by a main23 body
23 of
of 45
45
equipped with actuated wheels and two protruded structures to allow for climbing stairs.
The biped types of hybrid and leg-based robots are reported in Table 11.
Table 11.
Table11. Biped-based
11.Biped-based robots
Biped-basedrobots list.
robotslist.
list.
Table
Name
Name Solution
Solution Features
Features
Prototype
Prototype solution,
solution,
ZMP
ZMP (Zero
(Zero Moment
Prototype solution, ZMPMoment
WL-12RIII
WL-12RIII [94]
[94][94]
WL-12RIII Point)
Point) stability
stability
(Zero Moment Point) stability con-
con-
control,trol,
trol, teleoperated sys-
teleoperated
teleoperated system sys-
tem
tem
Prototype
Prototype solution,
solution,
Prototype
ZMP solution, Moment
ZMP
ZMP (Zero
(Zero Moment
RoboSapien [95] (Zero Moment Point) stability
RoboSapien
RoboSapien [95]
[95] Point)
Point) stability
stability con-
con-
control, teleoperated system
trol,
trol, teleoperated
teleoperated sys-
sys-
tem
tem
Cassie
Cassie [96,97].
[96,97].
Adapted
Adapted withwith permis-
permis-
sion
sion from
from White,
White, J.;
J.;
Swart,
Swart, D.;
D.; Hubicki,
Hubicki, C.;
C.;
Force-based Control
Force-based Control
of
of Bipedal
Bipedal Balancing
Balancing
on
on Dynamic
Dynamic Terrain
Terrain Prototype
Prototype solution,
solution,
with
with the
the "Tallahassee
"Tallahassee autonomous
autonomous walking
walking
Cassie"
Cassie" Robotic
Robotic Plat-
Plat-
Prototype solution,
ZMP (Zero Moment
RoboSapien [95] Point) stability con-
trol, teleoperated sys-
Robotics 2023, 12, 74
tem 15 of 37
Table 11. Cont.

Cassie [96,97].
Adapted with permis-
sion from
Cassie White,
[96,97]. J.;
Adapted with
permission
Swart, from White,
D.; Hubicki, C.; J.;
Swart, D.;Control
Force-based Hubicki, C.;
Force-based
of Bipedal Control of
Balancing
on Dynamic Terrain on
Bipedal Balancing
Dynamic Terrain with the Prototype
Prototype solution,
solution,
with the "Tallahassee
“Tallahassee Cassie” Robotic autonomous walking
autonomous walking
Cassie" Robotic2020
Platform. Plat-IEEE
form. 2020 IEEE Inter-
International Conference on
national
RoboticsConference
and Automation
on(ICRA),
Robotics and France,
Paris, Auto- 2020,
pp. 6618–6624,
mation 2020 J. White
(ICRA), Paris,
France, 2020, pp. 6618-
6624, 2020 J. White
WL-12RIII[94]
WL-12RIII [94]
and and RoboSapien
RoboSapien [95][95] are inspired
are inspired by humanoid
by humanoid locomotion.
locomotion. Cassie
Cassie [96,97]
is[96,97]
the most is the most
recent recent
robot robot
of the threeoflisted.
the three listed. Itsstructure
Its mechanical mechanical structure
resembles more resembles more
the hindlimbs
ofthe hindlimbs
a gazelle. ofthe
In all a gazelle.
solutionsInpresented,
all the solutions presented, itimportance
it is of fundamental is of fundamental
the use of importance
a control
for
thestanding
use of aand walking
control without tipping.
for standing Quadruped
and walking withouttype of hybrid
tipping. and leg-based
Quadruped typerobots are
of hybrid
reported
and
Robotics in
2023, 12,leg-based
x FOR Table
PEER 12.
robots
REVIEW
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW are reported in Table 12. 24 of 45
24 of 45
Table 12. Quadruped-based robots list.

Reference Solution Features
Reference Reference Solution
Quattroped
Quattroped
Quattroped
Quattroped [98,99].
[98,99]. Adapted
[98,99]. Adapted Prototype solution,
[98,99].
from Adapted
permission Prototype solution,
Adapted from permission
from permission
fromref.
permission
Prototype
Prototype system solution,
solution,
teleoperated
from [98] 2011 teleoperated system
from
from ref. [98] ref. [98] 2011
2011 teleoperated system
teleoperated system
from ref. [98]Chen
Shen-Chiang 2011
Shen-Chiang Chen
Shen-ChiangShen-Chiang
Chen Chen
Liu [100]. Adapted

Liu [100]. Adapted Prototype solution,
Liu
with[100]. Adapted
permission Prototype solution,
Liu [100]. Adapted
with with
permission Prototype
Prototype
teleoperated system, solution,
solution,
with
frompermission
ref. [100] teleoperated system,
permission from2017
ref.
from[100]
ref. [100] teleoperated system,
teleoperated
balancing control system,
from ref. [100]
Chih-Hsing balancing control
2017 Chih-Hsing balancing
systemcontrol
2017 Chih-Hsing
2017Liu
Chih-Hsing
Liu balancing
Liu system
Liu
Prototype solution,
PrototypePrototype
solution,
Prototype solution,
solution,
autonomous walking
Cheetah 3 [101]
Cheetah 3 [101] autonomous walking
autonomous walking
Cheetah 3 [101] autonomous walking
without use of cam-
Cheetah 3 [101] without use of cam-
without
without use
use of cam-
eras
eras
of cameras
eras
Commercial
Commercial
Spot [102] Commercial
solution,
Spot [102] solution,
Spot [102] solution,
autonomous walking
autonomous walking
autonomous walking
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 Prototype solution, 16 of 37
autonomous walking
Cheetah 3 [101]
without use of cam-
eras
Table 12. Cont.
Commercial
Spot [102] Spot [102] solution,
autonomous
autonomous walking walking
ANYmal [103].
ANYmal [103].
ANYmal [103].Adapted
Adapted
Adapted with
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW with per-
per- Prototype
25 of 45
Prototype solution,
mission from Prototype solution,
solution,
mission from ref.
ref. autonomous
autonomous walking walking
[103] autonomous walking
[103] 2016
ref. [103] 2016 Marco Marco
Hutter
2016 Marco
Hutter
Hutter
ANYmal [103].
Adapted with per-
Prototype solution,
mission from ref.
autonomous walking
[103] 2016 Marco
Hutter [104].
HyTRO-I [104]. HyTRO-I
Adapted
HyTRO-I [104].
Adapted
Adapted with
with per-
per- Prototype
Prototype solution,
mission Prototype solution,
solution,
mission from
from ref.
ref. manual manual control
ref. [104] 2013 Dongping
[104] Lu manual control
control
[104] 2013
2013 Dong-
Dong-
ping Lu
ping Lu
HyTRO-I [104].
Adapted with per-
In recent
Inthese
recent years
years these
these solutions
solutions have
have been
been increasingly
increasingly developed
developed with
with special
Prototype special atten-
solution,
atten-
In recent years
mission
tion to from ref.solutions have been increasingly developed with special atten-
to the
tion 2013
[104]
walking
walking gait
theDong- gait control.
control. WithWith their
their structure,
structure, Cheetah
Cheetah 33 [101], Spot
Spot [102],
[101],manual [102], ANYmal
control
ANYmal
tion to the walking [103] gait
and control.
HyTRO-I [104] With
simulate their
the structure,
movements of
[103] and HyTRO-I [104] simulate the movements of a four-legged mammalian animal.
ping
a Cheetah
four-legged
Lu (not shown in Table 12) uses a simpler solution and uses a reconfigurable
3
mammalian [101], Spot [102], ANY-
animal.
Labib
Labib [105]
[105] (not shown in Table 12) uses a simpler solution and uses a reconfigurable
mal [103] and HyTRO-IKlann [104] simulate the movements of a four-legged mammalian animal.
Klann linkage
linkage mechanism
mechanism to to perform
perform the the stair
stair climbing
climbing task.task. Finally,
Finally, Quattroped
Quattroped [98] [98] has
has
Labib [105] (not ashown in Table
a “transformation
“transformation 12) uses
mechanism”
mechanism” to a simpler
to modify
modify wheels
wheels as assolution
legs. and each
legs. Specifically,
Specifically, uses
each legahas
leg reconfigurable
has 2-DoF
2-DoF Klann
and can rotate and move linearly with respect to the hip, which
and can rotate and move linearly with respect to the hip, which is defined as the connect- is defined as the connect-
linkage mechanism ing to perform
point from the bodytheto stair
the climbing
leg/wheel and is task.
fixed onFinally,
the body. Quattroped
A hexapod type [98] has a “trans-
of
ing point from the body to the leg/wheel and is fixed on the body. A hexapod type of
formation mechanism” hybrid and to
and
In recent
hybrid years modify
leg-based
leg-basedtheserobot wheels
is
is reported
solutions
robot have been
reported asin legs.
in Table 13.Specifically,
13.
increasingly
Table Rhex [106]
[106] is
Rhexdeveloped each
is inspired
with
inspired byleg
by
special has 2-DoF and can
cockroach
atten-
cockroach
locomotion
tionlocomotion to
to the walkingto traverse highly
gait control.
traverse highlyWithfractured
their and
fractured unstable
structure,
and unstable terrain,
Cheetah as
as well
3 [101],
terrain, well as
as to
Spot ascend
[102],
to and
and de-
ANYmal
ascend de-
rotate and move [103]
linearly
scendandaa HyTRO-I
scend
with
particular
particular[104]
respect
flight of
of stairs.
flightsimulate
stairs.the
to
It
It has
the hip,
66 rotational
movements
has rotational
which
of DoFs, one is
one for
a four-legged
DoFs,
defined
for each leg.
mammalian
each leg.
as the
animal.
connecting point
from the bodyLabib to the [105]leg/wheel
(not shown in Table and12) is uses
fixed on the
a simpler body.
solution A hexapod
and uses a reconfigurable type of hybrid and
Table
Table 13.
13. Hexapod-based
Hexapod-based robots list.
mechanismrobots list. the stair climbing task. Finally, Quattroped [98] has
leg-based robotKlann is linkage
reported
a “transformation
in Table
mechanism”
to perform
13. Rhex
to modifySolution
[106] is inspired by cockroach
wheels as legs. Specifically, each leg has 2-DoF
locomotion to
Name
Features
traverse highlyand fractured and unstable terrain, as well as
can rotate and move linearly with respect to the hip, which is defined as the connect- to ascend and descend a particular
ing point from the body to the leg/wheel and is fixed on the body. A hexapod type of
flight of stairs. hybrid
It has 6 rotational DoFs, one for each leg.
and leg-based robot is reported in Table 13. Rhex [106] is inspired by cockroach
RHex
locomotion
RHexto [106].
traverse highly fractured and unstable terrain, as well as to ascend and de-
[106].
Adapted
scend with
a particular per-
flight of stairs. It has 6 rotational DoFs, one for each leg. Prototype
Prototype solution,
Table 13. Hexapod-based
Adapted robots
with per- list. solution,
mission
mission fromfrom ref.
ref. automatic
automatic stair-
stair-
Table[106]
13. Hexapod-based
2002 E.Z. robots list. climbing
[106] 2002 E.Z. climbing system
system
Name Name Moore
Moore
Solution
Solution Features
Features
RHex [106].
RHex [106]. Adapted Thewith
The only
only wheeled-based
wheeled-based robot
robot is
is reported
reported in
in Table
Table 14.
14. Two
Two large
large wheels are used
used to
wheelssolution,
aresolution,
to
Adapted
perform
with
the
per-
stair-climbing
Prototype
Prototype automatic
permission from ref. [106]
perform
mission stair-climbing task.
the ref.
from task. They
They are
are suspended
suspended respect
respect to
to the
the robot’s
robot’s frame
frame
automatic
by
by two
stair- two
2002 E.Z. Moore
[106] 2002 E.Z. climbing system
Moore
The only wheeled-based robot is reported in Table 14. Two large wheels are used to
The only wheeled-based robot
perform the stair-climbing is reported
task. They inrespect
are suspended Table 14.robot’s
to the Twoframe
large wheels are used to
by two
perform the stair-climbing task. They are suspended respect to the robot’s frame by two
parallel elastic jumping mechanisms. Ascento Pro can overcome full flights of stairs, drive
at up to 12 km/h and all this for up to 8 h per battery charge.
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 parallel elastic jumping mechanisms. Ascento Pro can overcome full flights of stairs,17drive
of 37
at up to 12 km/h and all this for up to 8 h per battery charge.
Table 14. Wheeled-based robots list.

Table 14. Wheeled-based robots list.
Commercial solu-
tion, autonomous
Ascento Pro Pro
Ascento [107]
[107] autonomous drive, outdoor
drive, outdoor sur-
survelliance service
velliance service
4. Analysis and Comparison

4. Analysis and Comparison
In this section, various performance metrics are presented that consider allowable
In this section, various performance metrics are presented that consider allowable
payload, maximum climbing speed, maximum crossable slope, transport ability and their
payload, maximum climbing speed, maximum crossable slope, transport ability and their
combinations. By referring to these metrics, it is possible to compare vehicles with different
combinations. By referring to these metrics, it is possible to compare vehicles with differ-
locomotion modes and properties, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of each.
ent locomotion modes and properties, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of
each.Performance Metrics
4.1.
Various metrics, suggested by Binnard [108], are introduced to quantitatively evaluate
4.1. Performance Metrics
the performance of a given stair-climbing vehicle. Special attention has been given to
Various metrics,
the normalization suggested
of the metrics by Binnard
allowing [108], are introduced
heterogeneous platformstoto
quantitatively evalu-
be fairly compared.
ate the performance of a given stair-climbing vehicle. Special attention has been
Metrics were estimated based on the specifications stated in related scientific papers or given to
the normalization
technical of thedata
sheets. Where metrics
are allowing heterogeneous
not available, platforms
corresponding to are
metrics be fairly compared.
not calculated.
Metrics were estimated based on the specifications stated in related scientific
The first performance metric is the payload capacity, PC, defined as the percentage papers or
technical sheets. Where data are not available,
ratio of the maximum payload mass to the robot mass: corresponding metrics are not calculated.
The first performance metric is the payload capacity, PC, defined as the percentage
ratio of the maximum payload mass topayload mass
the robot mass:
PC = × 100 (1)
robot net mass
𝑝𝑎𝑦𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠
PC = × 100 (1)
As a second metric, the normalized𝑟𝑜𝑏𝑜𝑡 𝑛𝑒𝑡 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠
speed, NS, can be defined as the ratio of the robot
As a second
maximum climbingmetric,
speed the
tonormalized speed,
the robot body NS, can be defined as the ratio of the robot
length.
maximum climbing speed to the robot body length.
Maximun Speed
NS = 𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑛 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑
NS = Body length (2)
𝐵𝑜𝑑𝑦 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ
(2)
an overall
As an overallperformance
performancemetric,
metric,the
the Normalized
Normalized Work
Work Capability,
Capability, NWC,
NWC, cancon-
can be be
considered. It is suggested by Binnard [108] and it is defined as the product of the Nor-
sidered. It is suggested by Binnard [108] and it is defined as the product of the Normalized
malized
Speed Speed
(NS) and(NS) and Payload
Payload CapacityCapacity
(PC). (PC).
NWC
NWC = PC
= PC ××NS
NS (3)
(3)
Figure 4 shows a bar chart where the Normalized Work Capability is estimated for
Figure 4 shows
the wheelchair a bar chart
type vehicles where the
presented Normalized
in Sections Work
3.1 and 3.2. Capability
Details canisbeestimated for
found in the
the wheelchair type vehicles presented in Sections 3.1 and 3.2. Details can be
Appendix A Tables A1–A3 where the numeric value of PC, NS and NWC are provided for found in the
Appendix A Tables
each platform. A1–A3towhere
Red refers the numeric
track-based, value
blue to wheel PC, NS and NWC
of cluster-based, aretoprovided
green for
hybrid and
each platform.
leg-based Red refers
and yellow to track-based,
to articulated blue to wheelrobots.
mechanism-based cluster-based, green to hybrid and
leg-based and yellow to articulated mechanism-based robots.
It can be said that NWC quantifies the robot general performance, as it considers both
the ability to carry payload and the climbing speed. As seen from the bar charts, the NWC
metric well defines the different robot categories: track-based, wheel cluster-based, hybrid
and leg-based and articulated mechanism-based. In fact, each category has a characteristic
range of NWC. Articulated mechanism-based robots are mainly concentrated in the range of
values that varies between 0 and 3 [s−1 ]. Even legged robots have low NWC values, ranging
between 0 and 5 [s−1 ]. Wheel cluster-based robots have high NWC values and are mostly
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 18 of 37
concentrated in the range between 5 and 15 [s−1 ]. Finally, the track-based stair-climbing
robots are distributed evenly over the entire range of NWC values, where the most recent
robots have NWC values ranging from 6 to 18 [s−1 ].
The NWC of carrier type robots is presented in Figure 5.
Figure 4. Normalized Work Capability comparison for wheelchair type robots; Chen [55]; TBW-I
[53]; Lawn [52]; Morales [51]; RT-Mover PType WA [48–50]; WL-16 II [45,46]; Lee [47]; Zero Carrier
[41,42]; Wheelchiar.q [37,38]; iBOT 4000 [35,36]; All-Terrain Wheelchair [34]; Caterwill GTS5 Lux
[32]; B-Free Ranger [30]; Tao [29]; WT-Wheelchair [27,28]; TopChair-S [26]; Scewo Bro [25].
range of NWC. Articulated mechanism-based robots are mainly concentrated in the range
of values that varies between 0 and 3 [s−1]. Even legged robots have low NWC values,
ranging between 0 and 5 [s−1]. Wheel cluster-based robots have high NWC values and are
Figure 4.Normalized
NormalizedWork WorkCapability
Capability comparison for wheelchair type robots; Chen [55]; TBW-I
Figure
mostly4. concentrated in the range comparison
between 5 for andwheelchair type
15 [s−1]. Finally, robots;
theChen [55];
track-basedTBW-I [53];
stair-
[53];
Lawn Lawn
[52]; [52];
MoralesMorales
[51]; [51];
RT-MoverRT-Mover
PType PType
WA WA
[48–50];[48–50];
WL-16 WL-16
II [45,46];II [45,46];
Lee Lee
[47]; [47];
Zero Zero
Carrier Carrier
[41,42];
climbing robots are[37,38];
[41,42]; Wheelchiar.q distributed evenly
iBOT 4000 overAll-Terrain
[35,36]; the entireWheelchair
range of NWC values, where
[34]; Caterwill the
GTS5 Lux
Wheelchiar.q
most recent [37,38];
robots iBOT
have 4000
NWC [35,36];
values All-Terrain
ranging Wheelchair
from 6 to 18[34];
[s −1Caterwill
]. GTS5 Lux [32]; B-Free
[32]; B-Free Ranger [30]; Tao [29]; WT-Wheelchair [27,28]; TopChair-S [26]; Scewo Bro [25].
Ranger [30];
The Tao [29];
NWC WT-Wheelchair
of carrier type robots[27,28]; TopChair-S
is presented [26]; Scewo
in Figure 5. Bro [25].
range of NWC. Articulated mechanism-based robots are mainly concentrated in the range
of values that varies between 0 and 3 [s−1]. Even legged robots have low NWC values,
ranging between 0 and 5 [s−1]. Wheel cluster-based robots have high NWC values and are
mostly concentrated in the range between 5 and 15 [s−1]. Finally, the track-based stair-
climbing robots are distributed evenly over the entire range of NWC values, where the
most recent robots have NWC values ranging from 6 to 18 [s−1].
The NWC of carrier type robots is presented in Figure 5.
Figure5.5. Normalized
Figure Normalized Work
Work Capability
Capability comparison
comparisonfor
forcarrier
carriertype
typerobots;
robots;Deshmukh
Deshmukh[68]; iRobot
[68]; iRobot
710 Kobra [63]; Haulerbot [62]; HELIOS-VI [61]; TAQT Carrier [60]; Yoneda [59].
Normalized Work
Normalized Work Capability
Capability is
is not
not the
the only
only metric
metric toto measure
measurethetheperformance
performanceofof
payload stair-climbing robots. To evaluate the versatility of use of one robotcompared
payload stair-climbing robots. To evaluate the versatility of use of one robot comparedtoto
another,the
another, themaximum
maximum crossable
crossable step
step height
height and
and stair
stair slope
slopearearealso
alsoused
usedas
asperformance
performance
metrics. Maximum
metrics. Maximumcrossable
crossablestep height
step andand
height stairstair
slope are reported
slope in Appendix
are reported A TableA
in Appendix
A4 for each existing vehicle. A graphical representation of the maximum crossable
Table A4 for each existing vehicle. A graphical representation of the maximum crossable height
and slope is given below. Figure 6 refers to wheelchair-type robots while Figure
height and slope is given below. Figure 6 refers to wheelchair-type robots while Figure 7 refers7
refers to carrier-type robots. Based on these two metrics, different categories do not cluster
clearly. Each single robot may be designed in such a way to match desired values of
maximum step height and slope regardless of the category it belongs.
Figure 5. Normalized Work Capability comparison for carrier type robots; Deshmukh [68]; iRobot
Normalized Work Capability is not the only metric to measure the performance of
payload stair-climbing robots. To evaluate the versatility of use of one robot compared to
another, the maximum crossable step height and stair slope are also used as performance
metrics. Maximum crossable step height and stair slope are reported in Appendix A Table
A4 for each existing vehicle. A graphical representation of the maximum crossable height
and slope is given below. Figure 6 refers to wheelchair-type robots while Figure 7 refers
to carrier-type robots. Based on these two metrics, different categories do not cluster
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 to carrier-type robots. Based on these two metrics, different categories do not cluster
19 of 37
clearly. Each single robot may be designed in such a way to match desired values of max-
clearly. Each single robot may be designed in such a way to match desired values of max-
imum step height and slope regardless of the category it belongs.
imum step height and slope regardless of the category it belongs.
Figure6.6.Max
Figure Maxcrossable
crossableheight
heightand
andslope
slopecomparison
comparisonfor for wheelchair
wheelchair type
type robots;
robots; Chen
Chen [55];
[55]; HE-
HELIOS-
Figure
LIOS-V 6.[54];
MaxTBW-I
crossable
[53];height
Lawn and
[52];slope comparison
Morales [51]; for wheelchair
RT-Mover PType type
WA robots;WL-16
[48–50]; Chen [55];
II HE-
[45,46];
VLIOS-V
[54]; TBW-I TBW-I
[53]; Lawn [52]; Morales [51]; RT-Mover PType WA [48–50]; WL-16 II [45,46]; Lee [47];
Lee [47];[54];
Zero Carrier [53]; Lawn
[41,42]; [52]; Morales
Castillo [51]; RT-Mover
[39]; Wheelchiar.q PType
[37,38]; iBOTWA4000
[48–50]; WL-16
[35,36]; II [45,46];
All-Terrain
Zero
Lee Carrier
[47]; [41,42];
Zero Castillo
Carrier [39];
[41,42]; Wheelchiar.q
Castillo [39]; [37,38]; iBOT
Wheelchiar.q 4000 [35,36];
[37,38]; iBOT All-Terrain
4000 [35,36]; Wheelchair
All-Terrain [34];
Wheelchair [34]; Caterwill GTS5 Lux [32]; B-Free Ranger [30]; Tao [29]; WT-Wheelchair [27,28];
Caterwill
Wheelchair GTS5 Lux
[34]; [32]; B-Free
Caterwill GTS5 Ranger
Lux [30];B-Free
[32]; Tao [29]; WT-Wheelchair
Ranger [30]; Tao [27,28];
[29]; TopChair-S [26];
WT-Wheelchair Scewo
[27,28];
TopChair-S [26]; Scewo Bro [25].
TopChair-S
Bro [25]. [26]; Scewo Bro [25].
Figure 7. Max crossable height and slope comparison for carrier type robots; Wen [69]; Deshmukh
Figure
Figure 7.7.Max
[68] iRobotMax crossable
crossable
710 height
height
Kobra [63]; andslope
and
Haulerbotslope comparison
comparison
[62]; forfor
Yoneda [59]. carrier
carrier type
type robots;
robots; WenWen
[69];[69]; Deshmukh
Deshmukh [68]
[68] iRobot 710 Kobra [63]; Haulerbot [62]; Yoneda [59].
iRobot 710 Kobra [63]; Haulerbot [62]; Yoneda [59].
Here, the Transport Ability (TA) is introduced to quantify how effective the robot is
Here,the
Here, theTransport
TransportAbility
Ability(TA)
(TA)isisintroduced
introducedtoto quantify
quantify howhow effective
thethe robotatis
at carrying payload during stair-climbing operation. We defined iteffective
as the ratio robot
of the is
pay-
at carrying
carrying payload
payload during
during stair-climbing
stair-climbing operation.
operation. We We defined
defined it asit as
the the ratio
ratio of of
the the pay-
payload
load mass to the maximum robot power.
load mass
mass to theto the maximum
maximum robot robot
power.power.
𝑃𝑎𝑦𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠
Transport Ability (TA) [kg/W] = 𝑃𝑎𝑦𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 (4)
𝑅𝑜𝑏𝑜𝑡 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
Transport Ability (TA) [kg/W] =Payload (4)
mass
𝑅𝑜𝑏𝑜𝑡 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
TransportAbility (TA) [kg/W] = (4)
Robot power
The value of TA represents how many kilograms of payload the robot can transport
using a unit quantity of power, and so how effective the robot is during transport operation.
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 20 of 37

using a unit quantity of power, and so how effective the robot is during transport opera-
using a unit quantity of power, and so how effective the robot is during transport opera-
tion. Again, the values calculated for different robots are reported in Appendix A Table
Again, the values
tion. Again, calculated
the values for different
calculated robots
for different are reported
robots in Appendix
are reported A Table
in Appendix A5.
A Table
A5. When
When data data
are are not
not provided,
provided, the the metrics
metrics are are
not not reported.AAcomparison
reported. comparisonbar barchart
chartof
of
A5. When data are not provided, the metrics are not reported. A comparison bar chart of
Transport
Transport Ability values is provided in Figure 8 for wheelchair-type robots and in Figure
TransportAbility
Abilityvalues
valuesisisprovided
providedininFigure
Figure8 8for forwheelchair-type
wheelchair-type robots and
robots and in in
Figure 9
Figure
9 for
for carrier-type
carrier-type robots.Red
robots. Redisisused
usedtotoindicate
indicatetrack-based
track-basedrobots,
robots,blue
blueto
to wheel
wheel cluster-
cluster-
9 for carrier-type robots. Red is used to indicate track-based robots, blue to wheel cluster-
based, green
based, green tohybrid
hybrid and leg-based
leg-based and yellow
yellow to articulated
articulated mechanism-based robots. robots.
based, greento to hybridandand leg-basedand and yellow to to articulated mechanism-based
mechanism-based robots.
The
The most transport-effective categories appear to be track-based and wheel cluster-based
Themost
mosttransport-effective
transport-effectivecategories
categoriesappear
appearto tobebetrack-based
track-basedand andwheel
wheelcluster-based
cluster-based
because
because they
they reach
reach higher
higher value
value of
of TA.
TA. In
In fact,
fact, they
they combine
combine a
a good
good carrying
carrying capacitywith
capacity with
because they reach higher value of TA. In fact, they combine a good carrying capacity with
a small
aa small number of actuators. In contrast, the articulated mechanism-based robots and hy-
small number
number of of actuators.
actuators.InIncontrast,
contrast,thethe articulated
articulated mechanism-based
mechanism-based robots
robots andand
hy-
brid
andleg-based categories,
leg-basedcategories, using
categories,using many
usingmany actuators
manyactuators
actuators to to move
to move the
move the system,
the system, exhibit lower
brid and system, exhibit
exhibit lower
lower
transporteffectiveness
effectiveness becausethey they reachlower
lower valuesof of TA.
transport
transport effectivenessbecause
because theyreach
reach lowervalues values ofTA.
TA.
Figure 8.
Figure 8. Transport
Transport Ability
Abilitycomparison
comparisonfor forwheelchair
wheelchair type robots;
type Chen
robots; Chen[55]; HELIIOS-V
[55]; HELIIOS-V [54];[54];
Figure [53];
TBW-I 8. Transport
MoralesAbility comparison
[51]; RT-Mover for
PType wheelchair
WA [48–50];type robots;
WL-16 Chen
II [45,46]; [55];
Lee HELIIOS-V
[47]; [54];
Zero Carrier
TBW-I
TBW-I [53];
[53];Morales
Morales[51]; RT-Mover
[51]; RT-Mover PType
PTypeWA WA[48–50]; WL-16
[48–50]; II [45,46];
WL-16 II LeeLee
[45,46]; [47];[47];
ZeroZero
Carrier [41,42];
Carrier
[41,42]; Castillo [39]; Wheelchiar.q [37,38]; iBOT 4000 [35,36]; All-Terrain Wheelchair [34]; B-Free
Castillo
[41,42]; [39]; Wheelchiar.q
Castillo [39]; [37,38]; iBOT
Wheelchiar.q 4000iBOT
[37,38]; [35,36];
4000All-Terrain
[35,36]; Wheelchair
All-Terrain [34]; B-Free
Wheelchair Ranger
[34]; B-Free[30];
Ranger [30]; Tao [29]; TopChair-S [26].
Ranger
Tao [29]; [30]; Tao [29];
TopChair-S TopChair-S [26].
[26].
Figure 9. Transport Ability comparison for carrier type robots; Deshmukh [68]; Haulerbot [62] HE-
Figure9.
LIOS-VI
Figure 9.[61];
Transport
TAQT Ability
Transport Abilitycomparison
Carrier comparisonfor
[60]. forcarrier type
carrier robots;
type Deshmukh
robots; [68];
Deshmukh Haulerbot
[68]; [62] [62]
Haulerbot HE-
LIOS-VI [61]; TAQT Carrier [60].
HELIOS-VI [61]; TAQT Carrier [60].
4.2. Comparison Charts
4.2.Comparison
4.2. ComparisonCharts
Charts
To have a graphical representation of the various performance metrics and their cor-
Tohave
To have a graphical
graphical representation
representationofofthethevarious performance
various performancemetrics andand
metrics theirtheir
cor-
relation, several scatter plots are provided. Track-based robots are reported with red
correlation, several
relation, several scatter
scatter plotsare
plots areprovided.
provided.Track-based
Track-basedrobots
robots are
are reported with
with red
red
points, wheel cluster-based robots are reported in blue, hybrid and leg-based robots are
points,
points,wheel
wheelcluster-based
cluster-based robots
robots are
arereported
reportedin inblue,
blue,hybrid
hybridand
andleg-based
leg-basedrobots
robotsareare
reported in green, and articulated mechanism-based robot with yellow points. Figure 10
reported
reportediningreen,
green,and
andarticulated
articulatedmechanism-based
mechanism-basedrobotrobotwith
withyellow
yellowpoints.
points.Figure
Figure10 10
relates the two independent metrics: the Payload Capacity and the Normalized Speed. It
relates
relates the two independent metrics: the Payload Capacity and the Normalized Speed.ItIt
the two independent metrics: the Payload Capacity and the Normalized Speed.
can be observed that most of the points fall below an imaginary diagonal that from the
can
canbebeobserved
observed that
that most
most of
ofthe
thepoints
pointsfall
fallbelow
belowan animaginary
imaginarydiagonal
diagonal that
that from
fromthethe
top left to the bottom right cuts the graph into two parts. This highlights the intuitive
inverse proportionality that exists between the payload and the transport speed. The lower
lipse of the articulated mechanism-based robots (marked in yellow) lies in an area at the
bottom of the graph. These vehicles cannot carry a load greater than the robot’s own
weight and never exceed a Normalized Speed of 0.02 s−1. Hybrid and leg-based robots
(green ellipse), despite being able to carry a wide range of payloads, never exceed an NS
Robotics 2023, 12, 74
value greater than 0.1 s−1. Wheel cluster-based vehicles are always able to carry a payload
21 of 37
comparable to the weight of the robot and at a speed higher than both that of articulated
mechanism-based robots and that of hybrid and leg-based robots. Finally, the track-based
robots are distributed in the central area of the graph. It is thus evident that they can carry
the payload, the higher the speed of the robot. On the contrary, when the payload to
a payload comparable to the weight of the robots. In addition, the arrangement of the
be transported is very heavy, the speed of the robot decreases considerably. Articulated
ellipse on the graph shows that track-based robots on average have a higher transport
mechanism-based robots deviate from this behavior. Indeed, the normalized speed is almost
speed than the other categories.
independent on the payload capacity of each robot, as a result of a technical limitation of
the gate-based walking strategy typical for this category.
10. Payload Capacity—Normalized speed scatter plot.

Figure 10.
It
InisFigure
important toNWC
11, the observe the distribution
is shown of the
as a function various
of the PC for types of robots
the four typesinofthe graph
vehicles.
of
TheFigure 10. Forinthe
distribution two-dimensional
this plane is significant. ([NS, PC])
dataAgain, pertaining
to better highlightto athe
given category,of
arrangement a
standard deviational ellipse can be defined centered on the mean center and
the different categories within the chart, it is also possible to add the already mentioned considering
one standard
Gaussian deviation.
ellipses to the These
graph.ellipses were created
These ellipses usingon
are based thethe
Gaussian Ellipsoids
statistical values offunction
the PC
of the MatLab ® software (MathWorks, Natick, MA, USA). It can be seen how the ellipse of
and NWC parameters. Recall that the NWC is an index of the total performance of the
the articulated
vehicle, mechanism-based
as it considers robots (marked
the load transported and in yellow)
the speed lies in an area[104].
of transport at theOnce
bottom of
a PC
the graph.
value These vehicles
is calculated, cannot to
it is possible carry a load
identify greater
which than the
category ofrobot’s own
robot has weight
better and never
performance
exceed a Normalized Speed of 0.02 s −1 . Hybrid and leg-based robots (green ellipse), despite
based on the position of the ellipses in the chart plan. Track-based and wheel cluster-based
being able to carry a wide range of payloads, never exceed an NS value greater than 0.1 s−1 .
Wheel cluster-based vehicles are always able to carry a payload comparable to the weight
of the robot and at a speed higher than both that of articulated mechanism-based robots
and that of hybrid and leg-based robots. Finally, the track-based robots are distributed in
the central area of the graph. It is thus evident that they can carry a payload comparable to
the weight of the robots. In addition, the arrangement of the ellipse on the graph shows
that track-based robots on average have a higher transport speed than the other categories.
In Figure 11, the NWC is shown as a function of the PC for the four types of vehicles.
The distribution in this plane is significant. Again, to better highlight the arrangement of
the different categories within the chart, it is also possible to add the already mentioned
Gaussian ellipses to the graph. These ellipses are based on the statistical values of the PC
and NWC parameters. Recall that the NWC is an index of the total performance of the
vehicle, as it considers the load transported and the speed of transport [104]. Once a PC
value is calculated, it is possible to identify which category of robot has better performance
based on the position of the ellipses in the chart plan. Track-based and wheel cluster-based
robots are more suitable for carrying a load on stairs because their ellipses reach higher
values of NWC than the articulated mechanism-based and hybrid and leg-based robots.
values of NWC than the articulated mechanism-based and hybrid and leg-based robots.
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 values of NWC than the articulated mechanism-based and hybrid and leg-based robots. 22 of 37
Figure 11. Normalized Work Capability—Payload Capacity scatter plot.
Figure
Figure 11.
We11. Normalized
Normalized
define Work
Work
the stairs Capability—Payload
Capability—Payload
slope Capacity
Capacity
as the inclination scatter
respectscatter plot.
plot.
the horizontal of the notional line
connecting the nosings of all treads in a flight. Compared to the step height, the slope
WeWedefine
definethethestairs
stairsslope
slope asthetheinclination
inclination respectthe the horizontalofofthe the notionalline
line
considers not only the height ofasthe step, but alsorespect
the depthhorizontal
of the same. For notional
this reason,
connecting
connecting the nosings
the nosings of all treads
of all treads in a flight.
in a flight. Compared
Compared to the step
to the step height,
height, the slope
the slope
when comparing the performance of different robots, it is preferable to use the maximum
considersnot
considers notonly
onlythethe heightofofthethestep,
step,but
butalso
alsothe
thedepth
depthofofthethesame.
same.For Forthis
thisreason,
reason,
slope of the stairs. Then,height
Figure 12 illustrates the maximum stairs slope to payload capac-
when
when comparing
comparing the performance
the performance of different robots, it is preferable to use the maximum
ity scatter plot. It can be seen whichofslopedifferent robots,
of stairs canitovercome
is preferable
theto use the categories
different maximum
slopeofofthe
thestairs.
stairs.Then,
Then,Figure
Figure1212 illustrates
illustrates the
the maximum
maximum stairs slope to payload capacity
of robots. It emerges that most categories of robots are able to overcome values of capac-
slope stairs slope to payload stairs
scatter
ity scatterplot. It
plot. incan
It can be seen
be seen which slope
whichThese of
slope are stairs
of stairs can overcome
can overcome the different
the different categories
slope included the range 25–45°. the typical slope values of stairscategories
for most
ofofrobots.
real
robots.ItItemerges
emergesthat
applications.
thatmost
mostcategories
categoriesofofrobots
robotsareareable
abletotoovercome
overcomevalues valuesofofstairs
stairs
slope included in the range 25–45◦ . These are the typical slope values of stairs for most
slope included in the range 25–45°. These are the typical slope values of stairs for most
real applications.
real applications.
Figure 12.12.
Figure Maximum stairs
Maximum slope—Payload
stairs Capacity
slope—Payload scatter
Capacity plot.
scatter plot.
FigureIn
12.Figure 13 the
Maximum maximum
stairs stairs slope
slope—Payload values
Capacity for plot.
scatter the different robots are diagrammed
as a function of Normalized Work Capability instead of Payload Capacity. The maximum
slope range of stairs is always between 25◦ and 45◦ . The graph shows that the two categories
that have the highest total performance are track-based and wheel cluster-based, as they
have higher Normalized Work Capability values in that range, so that they are most suitable
In Figure 13 the maximum stairs slope values for the different robots are diagrammed
as a function of Normalized Work Capability instead of Payload Capacity. The maximum
slope range of stairs is always between 25° and 45°. The graph shows that the two catego-
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 ries that have the highest total performance are track-based and wheel cluster-based, as37
23 of
they have higher Normalized Work Capability values in that range, so that they are most
suitable to perform the stair-climbing task respect to articulated mechanism-based and
to perform robots. task respect to articulated mechanism-based and hybrid and
the stair-climbing
leg-based robots.
Figure 13.13.
Figure Maximum Stairs
Maximum Slope—Normalized
Stairs Work
Slope—Normalized WorkCapability
Capabilityscatter
scatterplot.
plot.
Figure
Figure 1414 shows
shows thethe Transport
Transport Ability
Ability versus
versus Payload
Payload Capacity
Capacity scatter
scatter plot.plot.
Again,Again,
to
to better
better highlight
highlight the arrangement
the arrangement of theofdifferent
the different categories
categories withinwithin the chart,
the chart, it is
it is also also
pos-
possible
sible to addtothe
add the already
already mentioned
mentioned GaussianGaussian
ellipsesellipses to the These
to the graph. graph.ellipses
These ellipses
are based are
onbased on the statistical
the statistical values ofvalues
the TAofand TA parameters.
the PC and PC parameters.
Hybrid and Hybrid and leg-based
leg-based robot
robot ellipse
isellipse
almostishorizontal,
almost horizontal,
sign thatsign that the Transport
the Transport Ability
Ability varies varies
little little
as the as the
load loadvaries.
carried carried
varies. Moreover, hybrid and leg-based category has the lowest transport
Moreover, hybrid and leg-based category has the lowest transport ability for all payload
ability for all
31 of 43
payload capacity values. On the contrary, wheel cluster-based robot ellipse
capacity values. On the contrary, wheel cluster-based robot ellipse is almost vertical, sign is almost vertical,
sign
that that
the the Transport
Transport AbilityAbility
varies varies
greatlygreatly
dependingdepending
on the on the climbing
climbing mechanismmechanism used.
used. The
The high
most mosttransport
high transport
abilityability
value value
belongsbelongs to track-based
to track-based robotsrobots category.
category.
Figure 14.
Figure 14. Transport
Transport Ability
Ability to
to Payload
Payload Capacity
Capacity scatter
scatter plot.
plot.
At
At the end, Figure 15 relates
relates the
the two
two independent
independent metrics:
metrics: the Transport
Transport Ability
Ability and
and
the
the Normalized Work Work Capability.
Capability. As
Aswe wehave
havealready
alreadysaid,
said,
thethe NWC
NWC is an
is an index
index thatthat
re-
reflects a bit the overall performance of the robot, since it considers
flects a bit the overall performance of the robot, since it considers both both the load capacity
and the transport speed of the robot. Similarly, TA is an index that considers how much
power the robot needs to carry a unit load. Based on these two parameters, the Transport
Ability-Normalized Work Capability graph can be divided into four zones: (1) in the top
right the area of the robots with high overall performance and high transport ability, (2)
in the bottom right the area of the robots with high overall performance but with low
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 24 of 37
and the transport speed of the robot. Similarly, TA is an index that considers how much
power the robot needs to carry a unit load. Based on these two parameters, the Transport
Ability-Normalized Work Capability graph can be divided into four zones: (1) in the top
right the area of the robots with high overall performance and high transport ability, (2) in
the bottom right the area of the robots with high overall performance but with low transport
ability, (3) in the top left the area of the robots with high transport ability but with
Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 32 oflow
43
overall performance, (4) in the bottom left the area of the robots with low transport ability
and low overall performance. Moreover, in this case, to highlight the arrangement of the
points of the different categories, the ellipses have been added.
Figure
Figure15.
15.Transport
TransportAbility
AbilitytotoNormalized
NormalizedWork
WorkCapability
Capabilityscatter
scatterplot.
plot.
So, from the

4.3. Complexity andposition
Cost Issues of the ellipses in the TA-NWC plan in the figure, it is possible to
haveDrawing
important indications on the different
from [109], fundamental designcategories of robots
choice criteria in that
mobilecannot be deduced
robotics are me-a
priori through a single qualitative analysis
chanical and control complexity, as also underlined in [5]. of the systems. Articulated mechanism-based
robots are shown
Mechanical to have variable
complexity transport ability
has a considerable depending
influence on theon the climbing
reliability mechanism
of robot opera-
used. However, they demonstrate low overall performance by positioning
tion. Track-based and wheel cluster-based robots are apparently simple and robust, while themselves in the
leftmost area of the graph plane in Figure 15. Wheel cluster-based
robots with complicated mechanical designs, such as legged and articulated mechanism- and track-based robots
are the categories that come closest to the area of the plan with high overall performance
based robots are complex and delicate. Control complexity has significant influence on
and high transport ability, proving to be the most suitable categories for transporting a
the robot motion control. It is higher for solutions involving legs and a sophisticated mech-
payload on a flight of stairs. In contrast, the hybrid and leg-based robots category clusters
anism due to gait planning requirements.
in an area with low transport ability and low overall performance.
Mechanical and control complexity can be used to evaluate the simplicity of realiza-
tion of one robotand
4.3. Complexity compared
Cost Issuesto another. Therefore, in addition to the performance metrics
of Section 4.1, it is decided to develop a qualitative evaluation scale of mechanical com-
Drawing from [109], fundamental design choice criteria in mobile robotics are mechan-
plexity (MC) and control complexity (CC) for the robots analyzed in this paper. Detailed
ical and control complexity, as also underlined in [5].
numeric data are presented in Appendix A Table A6. Scores start from low and continue
Mechanical complexity has a considerable influence on the reliability of robot opera-
with medium-low, medium, medium-high, high and very-high.
tion. Track-based and wheel cluster-based robots are apparently simple and robust, while
Another fundamental design parameter is the overall cost. From mechanical and con-
robots with complicated mechanical designs, such as legged and articulated mechanism-
trol complexity, it is possible to obtain an idea of the possible cost of the robot. It is plau-
based robots are complex and delicate. Control complexity has significant influence on
sible that anmotion
the robot expensive solution
control. It ishas very for
higher high complexity.
solutions Therefore,
involving legs cost
and isa used to eval-
sophisticated
uate the simplicity
mechanism due toofgaitrealization
planningofrequirements.
one robot compared to another, and how much a robot
can beMechanical
easily soldand compared
control complexityone.
to another can be used to evaluate the simplicity of realization
It is also decided
of one robot compared to to
draw up a Therefore,
another. qualitative inevaluation
addition scale
to theofperformance
cost for the metrics
robots inof
this paper. Cost evaluation scores are presented in Appendix A Table A7.
Section 4.1, it is decided to develop a qualitative evaluation scale of mechanical complexity Scores start from
low
(MC) andand continue
control with low-medium,
complexity (CC) formedium,
the robots medium-high and paper.
analyzed in this high. To have anumeric
Detailed graph-
ical representation of the results obtained, a cost scale graph
data are presented in Appendix A Table A6. Scores start from low and continue is provided below in Figure
with
16. The five cost grades and the total
medium-low, medium, medium-high, high and very-high.number of robots belonging to each grade are re-
ported on the abscissa and ordinate axis, respectively.
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 25 of 37
Another fundamental design parameter is the overall cost. From mechanical and
control complexity, it is possible to obtain an idea of the possible cost of the robot. It is
plausible that an expensive solution has very high complexity. Therefore, cost is used to
evaluate the simplicity of realization of one robot compared to another, and how much a
robot can be easily sold compared to another one.
It is also decided to draw up a qualitative evaluation scale of cost for the robots in this
paper. Cost evaluation scores are presented in Appendix A Table A7. Scores start from low
and continue with low-medium, medium, medium-high and high. To have a 33 of 43
graphical
representation of the results obtained, a cost scale graph is provided below in Figure 16.
The five cost grades and the total number of robots belonging to each grade are reported
on the abscissa and ordinate axis, respectively.
Figure 16. 16.

Figure Cost scale
Cost graph.
scale graph.
It isItuseful
is useful
to to
saysay thatthe
that thewheelchair
wheelchairtype
typetrack-based
track-based robots
robots Scewo
Scewo BroBro[25]
[25]and
andB-Free
B-
Ranger [30] are now available for $40,536 and $17,688, respectively. Wheel
Free Ranger [30] are now available for $40,536 and $17,688, respectively. Wheel cluster- cluster-based
robot
based iBOT
robot 4000
iBOT Mobility
4000 MobilitySystem
System[35][35]
waswas
available forfor
available $26,000 in in
$26,000 thethe
period
periodfrom
from1999
to 2016.
1999 to 2016.
Figure
Figure 16 16 provides
provides informationononhow
information howrobots
robotstype
type affects
affects the
the cost.
cost. Due
Duetotothe
theelaborate
elab-
mechanical structure, the presence of numerous actuators and sensors
orate mechanical structure, the presence of numerous actuators and sensors and the and the complexity
com-
of theofcontrol
plexity system,
the control the most
system, expensive
the most robotsrobots
expensive are theare
legged ones, immediately
the legged followed
ones, immediately
by the articulated mechanism-based ones. Track-based robots have
followed by the articulated mechanism-based ones. Track-based robots have an average an average system cost,
while wheel-clustered robots are the cheapest type to make.
system cost, while wheel-clustered robots are the cheapest type to make.
5. Discussion
5. Discussion
This paper surveyed the current state-of-the-art in stair-climbing vehicles to obtain
This paper
useful surveyed
information thewhich
about currentcategory
state-of-the-art
of robotinisstair-climbing vehicles to
best able to transport obtainand
people
useful
heavyinformation
loads up aabout
flightwhich category
of stairs. In the of robot
first partisofbest able to atransport
the article, people and
brief description of the
heavy loads up a flight of stairs. In the first part of the article, a brief
stair-climbing existing mechanisms and method of operation are provided. Then, description of the
based
stair-climbing existing
on the capability mechanisms
of carrying and and
payload method of operation
the type are provided.
of locomotion Then,
mechanism, webased
propose
on athe capability of carrying payload and the type of locomotion mechanism,
general stair-climbing system categorization. Next, to compare the different we propose
payload
a general
robots,stair-climbing systemperformance
several quantitative categorization. Next,
metrics aretodefined
compare andthe differenton
calculated payload ro-
the purpose,
bots, several quantitative performance metrics are defined and calculated
namely: payload capacity, normalized speed, normalized work capability, maximum on the purpose,
namely: payloadmaximum
step height, capacity, normalized
stairs slopespeed, normalized
and transport workCorrelations
ability. capability, maximum step
among previous
height, maximum stairs slope and transport ability. Correlations among previous perfor-
mance metrics are sought by plotting one metric against the other, providing the reader
with an in-depth understanding of the stair climbing problem. Then, complexity and cost
issues are addressed. As a conclusion of the work, we tried to identify what to look at to
choose the best category for transporting people and heavy loads up a flight of stairs. The
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 26 of 37
performance metrics are sought by plotting one metric against the other, providing the
reader with an in-depth understanding of the stair climbing problem. Then, complexity
and cost issues are addressed. As a conclusion of the work, we tried to identify what to look
at to choose the best category for transporting people and heavy loads up a flight of stairs.
The normalized work capacity parameter is chosen to quantify the overall performance
of different climbing robots and the respective categories. A complete overview of the
different stair-climbing system performance is obtained when expressing Transport Ability
as a function of Normalized Work Capability. Since hybrid and leg-based robots are located
in the lower left area of the TA-NWC plan (Figure 15) and have a high cost, they prove to
be the least suitable category for transporting a payload on a flight of stairs. Moreover,
articulated mechanism-based robots do not seem suitable for stair-climbing operations.
This is because they have low overall performance, low transport ability, complicated
mechanical structure and control strategy. On the contrary, track-based and wheel cluster-
based robots prove to be the most suitable categories to perform the transport of a load
during the ascent of a flight of stairs. This is because they combine good overall performance
and good transport ability, positioning in the right part of the TA-NWC plan (Figure 16),
with low mechanical complexity, simple control strategy and low construction cost. With
these results it will be possible to design a track-based or wheel-cluster based robot that
better than articulated mechanism-based robots and hybrid and leg-based robots can
transport people and heavy loads up a flight of stairs. The posture control categorization,
the control algorithm categorization, the gait planning categorization, the driving force
distribution categorization and highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of them are
work understudied issues and future development. They have not been dealt with so as
not to make the paper too heavy to read.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.P., F.B., G.M. and G.R.; methodology, A.P.; writing—
original draft preparation, A.P. and G.R.; writing—review and editing, G.R. and F.B.; funding
acquisition, G.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The financial support of the project giving Smell sense To Agricultural Robotics (STAR),
ERA-NET COFUND ICT AGRI-FOOD (Grant No. 45207), is gratefully acknowledged. This work
was also partly supported by the Italian Ministry of University and Research under the Programme
“Department of Excellence” Legge 232/2016 (Grant No. CUP-D93C23000100001).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data supporting the findings of this study are available from the
corresponding author on request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Appendix A
In this appendix, performance metrics introduces in Section 4.1 are calculated for
the robots analyzed in this document. WT and CT indicate wheelchair type and carrier
type robots, respectively. When technical data are not provided, metrics are omitted.
Tables A1 and A2 show the Payload Capacity and Normalized speed, respectively. Normal-
ized Work Capability is calculated in Table A3. Maximum crossable step height and stairs
slope are reported in Appendix A Table A4. Then, Transport Ability values are calculated
in Table A5.
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 27 of 37
Table A1. Robot’s Payload Capacity.
Name Type Category PC [%] Payload/Robot

Scewo Bro Errore. [25] WT Track 74.07% 120 kg/162 kg
WT Wheelchair [27,28] WT Track 57.69% 75 kg/130 kg
TopChair-S [26] WT Track 73.33% 110 kg/150 kg
Tao [29] WT Track 150% 75 kg/50 kg
B-Free Ranger [30] WT Track 82.19% 120 kg/146 kg
Caterwil GTS5 Lux [33] WT Track 87.71% 100 kg/114 kg
All-Terrain Wheelchair [34] WT Track 50% 80 kg/160 kg
iBOT 4000 [35,36] WT Wheel cluster 123.63% 136 kg/110 kg
Wheelchair.q [37,38] WT Wheel cluster 88.77% 87 kg/98 kg
Zero Carrier [41,42] WT Hybrid and Leg 173.91% 80 kg/46 kg
Lee [47] WT Hybrid and Leg 85.71% 60 kg/70 kg
WL-16 II [45,46] WT Hybrid and Leg 96.77% 60 kg/62 kg
RT-Mover PType Articulated
WT 76.08% 70 kg/92 kg
WA [48–50] Mechanism
Articulated
Morales [51] WT 90% 90 kg/100 kg
Mechanism
Articulated
Lawn [52] WT 50% 80 kg/160 kg
Mechanism
Articulated
TBW-I [53] WT 38.96% 60 kg/154 kg
Mechanism
Articulated
HELIOS-V [54] WT 100% 50 kg/50 kg
Mechanism
Articulated
Chen [55] WT 100% 80 kg/80 kg
Mechanism
Yoneda [59] CT Track 92.30% 60 kg/65 kg
TAQT Carrier [60] CT Track 25.80% 80 kg/310 kg
HELIOS-VI [61] CT Track 141.17% 120 kg/85 kg
Haulerbot [62] CT Track 89.04% 130 kg/146 kg
iRobt 710 Kobra [63] CT Track 40.96% 68 kg/166 kg
Deshmukh [68] CT Wheel cluster 125% 10 kg/8 kg
Table A2. Robot’s Normalized Speed.
Name Type Category NS [s−1 ] Speed/Length

Scewo Bro [25] WT Track 0.18 s−1 21 cm/s/113.5 cm
WT Wheelchair [27,28] WT Track 0.07 s−1 10 cm/s/131 cm
TopChair-S [26] WT Track 0.16 s−1 19 cm/s/115 cm
Tao [29] WT Track 0.08 s−1 7.3 cm/s/90 cm
B-Free Ranger [30] WT Track 0.074 s−1 8.3 cm/s/112 cm
Caterwil GTS5 Lux [33] WT Track 0.21 s−1 22 cm/s/102 cm
All-Terrain
WT Track 0.19 s−1 30 cm/156 cm
Wheelchair [34]
iBOT 4000 [35,36] WT Wheel cluster 0.12 s−1 10 cm/s/81.3 cm
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 28 of 37
Table A2. Cont.
Name Type Category NS [s−1 ] Speed/Length

Wheelchair.q [37,38] WT Wheel cluster 0.14 s−1 10 cm/s/70.9 cm
Zero Carrier [41,42] WT Hybrid and Leg 0.01 s−1 1 cm/s/60 cm
Lee [47] WT Hybrid and Leg 0.02 s−1 2 cm/s/85.5 cm
WL-16 II [45,46] WT Hybrid and Leg 0.07 s−1 5 cm/s/70 cm
WT 0.02 s−1 2.2 cm/s/110 cm
Articulated
Morales [51] WT 0.007 s−1 1 cm/s/145 cm
Mechanism
Articulated
Lawn [52] WT 0.006 s−1 1 cm/s/170 cm
Mechanism
Articulated
TBW-I [53] WT 0.005 s−1 0.5 cm/s/108 cm
Mechanism
Articulated
Chen [55] WT 0.02 s−1 2 cm/s/82 cm
Mechanism
Yoneda [59] CT Track 0.09 s−1 10.2 cm/s/118 cm
TAQT Carrier [60] CT Track 0.10 s−1 14 cm/s/130 cm
HELIOS-VI [61] CT Track 0.06 s−1 7 cm/s/105.5 cm
Haulerbot [62] CT Track 0.072 s−1 8.3 cm/s/115 cm
iRobt 710 Kobra [63] CT Track 0.15 s−1 14 cm/s/91.4 cm
Deshmukh [68] CT Wheel cluster 0.08 s−1 6.28 cm/s/78 cm
Table A3. Robot’s Normalized Work Capability.
Name Type Category NWC[s−1 ]

Scewo Bro [25] WT Track 13.33 s−1
WT Wheelchair [27,28] WT Track 4.40 s−1
TopChair-S [26] WT Track 11.73 s−1
Tao [29] WT Track 12.14 s−1
B-Free Ranger [30] WT Track 6.08 s−1
Caterwil GTS5 Lux [33] WT Track 18.85 s−1
All-Terrain Wheelchair [34] WT Track 9.61 s−1
iBOT 4000 [35,36] WT Wheel cluster 14.83 s−1
Wheelchair.q [37,38] WT Wheel cluster 12.43 s−1
Zero Carrier [41,42] WT Hybrid and Leg 1.74 s−1
Lee [47] WT Hybrid and Leg 1.71 s−1
WL-16 II [45,46] WT Hybrid and Leg 6.77 s−1
Articulated
RT-Mover PType WA [48–50] WT 1.52 s−1
Mechanism
Articulated
Morales [51] WT 0.62 s−1
Mechanism
Articulated
Lawn [52] WT 0.3 s−1
Mechanism
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 29 of 37
Table A3. Cont.
Name Type Category NWC[s−1 ]

Articulated
TBW-I [53] WT 0.195 s−1
Mechanism
Articulated
Chen [55] WT 2 s−1
Mechanism
Yoneda [59] CT Track 8.30 s−1
TAQT Carrier [60] CT Track 2.58 s−1
HELIOS-VI [61] CT Track 8.47 s−1
Haulerbot [62] CT Track 6.41 s−1
iRobt 710 Kobra [63] CT Track 6.27 s−1
Deshmukh [68] CT Wheel cluster 10.06 s−1
Table A4. Crossable step height and stairs slope.
Name Type Category Step Height [cm] Stairs Slope [◦ ]

Scewo Bro [25] WT Track 20 cm 36◦
WT Wheelchair [27,28] WT Track 15 cm 25◦
TopChair-S [26] WT Track 20 cm 35◦
Tao [29] WT Track 18 cm 35◦
B-Free Ranger [30] WT Track 20 cm 35◦
Caterwil GTS5 Lux [33] WT Track 20 cm 40◦
All-Terrain
WT Track 17 cm 31◦
Wheelchair [34]
iBOT 4000 [35,36] WT Wheel cluster 20 cm 39◦
Wheelchair.q [37,38] WT Wheel cluster 24 cm 40◦
Castillo [39] WT Wheel cluster 18 cm 37◦
Zero Carrier [41,42] WT Hybrid and Leg 18 cm 27◦
Lee [47] WT Hybrid and Leg 25.5 cm 45◦
WL-16 II [45,46] WT Hybrid and Leg 15 cm 27◦
WT 17 cm 35◦
Articulated
Morales [51] WT 24 cm 40◦
Mechanism
Articulated
Lawn [52] WT 20 cm 35◦
Mechanism
Articulated
TBW-I [53] WT 20 cm 20◦
Mechanism
Articulated
HELIOS-V [54] WT 16 cm 28◦
Mechanism
Articulated
Chen [55] WT 20 cm 37.5◦
Mechanism
Yoneda [59] CT Track 16 cm 30◦
Haulerbot [62] CT Track 20 cm 38◦
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 30 of 37
Table A4. Cont.
Name Type Category Step Height [cm] Stairs Slope [◦ ]

iRobt 710 Kobra [63] CT Track 21.2 cm 45◦
Deshmukh [68] CT Wheel cluster 16 cm 40◦
Wen [69] CT Hybrid and Leg 20 cm 35.5◦
Table A5. Transport Ability values.
Name Type Category TA [kg/W] Power [W] Payload [kg]

TopChair-S [25] WT Track 0.137 800 W 110 kg
Tao [29] WT Track 0.075 1000 W 75 kg
B-Free Ranger [30] WT Track 0.08 1500 W 120 kg
All-Terrain
WT Track 0.087 920 W 80 kg
Wheelchair [34]
iBOT 4000 [35,36] WT Wheel cluster 0.075 1800 W 136 kg
Wheelchair.q [37,38] WT Wheel cluster 0.174 500 W 87 kg
Castillo [39] WT Wheel cluster 0.041 1430 W 60 kg
Zero Carrier [41,42] WT Hybrid and Leg 0.074 1080 W 80 kg
Lee [47] WT Hybrid and Leg 0.06 1200 W 60 kg
WL-16 II [45,46] WT Hybrid and Leg 0.033 1800 W 60 kg
WT 0.041 1700 W 70 kg
Articulated
Morales [51] WT 0.119 840 W 100 kg
Mechanism
Articulated
TBW-I [53] WT 0.066 900 W 60 kg
Mechanism
Articulated
HELIOS-V [54] WT 0.062 800 W 50 kg
Mechanism
Articulated
Chen [55] WT 0.025 3200 W 80 kg
Mechanism
TAQT Carrier [60] CT Track 0.044 1800 W 80 kg
HELIOS-VI [61] CT Track 0.193 622 W 120 kg
Haulerbot [62] CT Track 0.086 1500 W 130 kg
Deshmukh [68] CT Wheel cluster 0.069 144 W 10 kg
Qualitative evaluation scale of mechanical complexity (MC) and control complexity

(CC) are presented in Table A6. Grades start from low and continue with medium-low,
medium, medium-high and high. Finally, cost evaluation grades are presented in Table A7.
Grades start from low and continue with medium-low, medium, medium-high and high.
Table A6. Mechanical and Control Complexity values.
Name Type Category MC CC

Scewo Bro [25] WT Track Medium-low Medium-low
WT Wheelchair [27,28] WT Track Medium-high Medium-high
TopChair-S [26] WT Track Medium-low Medium-low
Tao [29] WT Track Medium-low Medium-low
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 31 of 37
Table A6. Cont.

B-Free Ranger [30] WT Track Medium-high Medium-high
ZED Evolution [31] WT Track Medium-high Medium-high
Caterwil GTS5 Lux [32] WT Track Medium-low Medium-high
Fortissimo [33] WT Track Medium-low Medium-high
Hkust [33] WT Track Low Medium-low
All-Terrain
WT Track Medium-high Medium-high
Wheelchair [34]
iBOT 4000 [35,36] WT Wheel cluster Medium-low Medium-high
Wheelchair.q [37,38] WT Wheel cluster Medium-low Medium-high
Castillo [39] WT Wheel cluster Low Low
Wang [40] WT Hybrid and Leg Medium-low Medium-high
Zero Carrier [41,42] WT Hybrid and Leg Medium-high High
Lee [47] WT Hybrid and Leg High High
JWCR-1 [43,44] WT Hybrid and Leg Very-high Very -high
WL-16 II [45,46] WT Hybrid and Leg Very -high Very -high
WT High High
Articulated
Morales [51] WT High High
Mechanism
Articulated
Lawn [52] WT High High
Mechanism
Articulated
TBW-I [53] WT High High
Mechanism
Articulated
HELIOS-V [54] WT Medium-high Medium-high
Mechanism
Articulated
Chen [55] WT High High
Mechanism
Articulated
RPWheel [56] WT Medium-high Medium-high
Mechanism
Zhang [57,58] CT Track Medium-low Medium-high
Dongsheng [67] CT Track Medium-low Medium-high
Htoo [65] CT Track Low Low
Amoeba Go-1 [22] CT Track Medium-low Medium-high
Yoneda [59] CT Track Low Low
Riuqin [66] CT Track Low Low
TAQT Carrier [60] CT Track Medium-low Medium-high
HELIOS-VI [61] CT Track Medium-low Medium-low
Haulerbot [62] CT Track Medium-high Medium-high
iRobt 710 Kobra [63] CT Track Medium-low Medium-high
Deshmukh [68] CT Wheel cluster Low Low
Wen [69] CT Hybrid and Leg Medium-high High
Shihua [72] CT Hybrid and Leg Medium-low Medium-high
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 32 of 37
Table A6. Cont.

PEOPLER-II [70,71] CT Hybrid and Leg High Most-high
Yeping [73] CT Hybrid and Leg Very-high Very-high
Articulated
Yinhui [74] CT Medium-high Medium-high
Mechanism
Table A7. Mechanical Complexity, Control Complexity and Cost Scale values.
Name Type Category Cost

Scewo Bro [25] WT Track Medium
WT Wheelchair [27,28] WT Track Medium
TopChair-S [26] WT Track Medium-low
Tao [29] WT Track Medium-low
B-Free Ranger [30] WT Track Medium
ZED Evolution [31] WT Track Medium
Caterwil GTS5 Lux [32] WT Track Medium-low
Fortissimo [33] WT Track Medium
Hkust [33] WT Track Medium-low
All-Terrain Wheelchair [34] WT Track Medium
iBOT 4000 [35,36] WT Wheel cluster Medium-low
Wheelchair.q [37,38] WT Wheel cluster Medium-low
Castillo [39] WT Wheel cluster Medium-low
Wang [40] WT Hybrid and Leg Medium
Zero Carrier [41,42] WT Hybrid and Leg High
Lee [47] WT Hybrid and Leg Medium-high
JWCR-1 [43,44] WT Hybrid and Leg High
WL-16 II [45,46] WT Hybrid and Leg High
Articulated
RT-Mover PType WA [48–50] WT Medium-high
Mechanism
Articulated
Morales [51] WT Medium-high
Mechanism
Articulated
Lawn [52] WT Medium-high
Mechanism
Articulated
TBW-I [53] WT Medium-high
Mechanism
Articulated
HELIOS-V [54] WT Medium
Mechanism
Articulated
Chen [55] WT Medium-high
Mechanism
Articulated
RPWheel [56] WT Medium
Mechanism
Zhang [57,58] CT Track Medium
Dongsheng [67] CT Track Medium
Htoo [65] CT Track Medium-low
Amoeba Go-1 [22] CT Track Medium
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 33 of 37
Table A7. Cont.
Name Type Category Cost

Yoneda [59] CT Track Medium-low
Riuqin [66] CT Track Medium-low
TAQT Carrier [60] CT Track Medium
HELIOS-VI [61] CT Track Medium-low
Haulerbot [62] CT Track Medium
iRobt 710 Kobra [63] CT Track Medium
Deshmukh [68] CT Wheel cluster Low
Wen [69] CT Hybrid and Leg Medium-high
Shihua [72] CT Hybrid and Leg Medium-low
PEOPLER-II [70,71] CT Hybrid and Leg High
Yeping [73] CT Hybrid and Leg High
Articulated
Yinhui [74] CT Medium
Mechanism
References
1. Green, J.; Clounie, J.; Galarza, R.; Anderson, S.; Campell-Smith, J.; Voicu, R.C. Optimization of an Intelligent Wheelchair: LiDAR
and Camera Vision for Obstacle Avoidance. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Control, Automation and
Systems, Busan, Republic of Korea, 27–30 November 2022; pp. 313–318.
2. Kaye, H.S.; Kang, T.; LaPlante, M. Mobility Device Use in the United States; Disability Statistics Report 14; U.S. Department of
Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research: Washington, DC, USA, 2000; Volume 14.
3. National Center for Health Statistics. Percentage of any difficulty walking or climbing steps for adults aged 18 and over, United
States, 2019–2020. In National Health Interview Survey; NCHS: Hyattsville, MD, USA, 2022.
4. Di Priamo, C. L’inclusione Scolastica: Accessibilità, Qualità Dell’offerta e Caratteristiche Degli Alunni con Sostegno; Report Istituto
Nazionale di Statistica Istat (Italian); ISTAT: Rome, Italy, 2020.
5. Bruzzone, L.; Quaglia, G. Locomotion systems for ground mobile robots in unstructured environments. Mech. Sci. 2012, 2, 49–62.
[CrossRef]
6. Reina, G.; Foglia, M. On the mobility of all-terrain rovers. Ind. Robot. 2013, 40, 121–131. [CrossRef]
7. Alamdari, A.; Krovi, V.N. Design of articulated leg–wheel subsystem by kinetostatic optimization. Mech. Mach. Theory 2016, 100,
222–234. [CrossRef]
8. Gong, Z.; Xie, F.; Liu, X.; Shentu, S. Obstacle-crossing strategy and formation parameters optimization of a multi-tracked-mobile-
robot system with a parallel manipulator. Mech. Mach. Theory 2020, 152, 103919. [CrossRef]
9. Li, H.; Qi, C.; Mao, L.; Zhao, Y.; Chen, X.; Gao, F. Staircase-climbing capability-based dimension design of a hexapod robot. Mech.
Mach. Theory 2021, 164, 104400. [CrossRef]
10. Li, H.; Qi, C.; Gao, F.; Chen, X.; Zhao, Y.; Chen, Z. Mechanism design and workspace analysis of a hexapod robot. Mech. Mach.
Theory 2022, 174, 104917. [CrossRef]
11. Jiang, H.; Xu, G.; Zeng, W.; Gao, F. Design and kinematic modeling of a passively-actively transformable mobile robot. Mech.
12. Wei, C.; Wu, J.; Sun, J.; Sun, H.; Yao, Y.; Ruan, Q. Reconfigurable design of a passive locomotion closed-chain multi-legged
platform for terrain adaptability. Mech. Mach. Theory 2022, 174, 104936. [CrossRef]
13. Ni, L.; Wu, L.; Zhang, H. Parameters uncertainty analysis of posture control of a four-wheel-legged robot with series slow active
suspension system. Mech. Mach. Theory 2022, 175, 104966. [CrossRef]
14. Zhang, F.; Yu, Y.; Wang, Q.; Zeng, X.; Niu, H. A terrain-adaptive robot prototype designed for bumpy-surface exploration. Mech.
Mach. Theory 2019, 141, 213–225. [CrossRef]
15. Robert, B. Climbing robots: Recent research and emerging applications. Ind. Robot. 2019, 46, 721–727.
16. Shin, J.; Son, D.; Kim, Y.; Seo, T. Design exploration and comparative analysis of tail shape of tri-wheel-based stair-climbing
robotic platform. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 19488. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17. Sundaram, S.A.; Wang, H.; Ding, D.; Cooper, R.A. Step-Climbing Power Wheelchairs: A Literature Review. Top. Spinal Cord Inj.
Rehabil. 2017, 23, 98–109. [CrossRef]
18. Grigore, L.S.; Oncioiu, I.; Priescu, I.; Joi, D. Development and Evaluation of the Traction Characteristics of a Crawler EOD Robot.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3757. [CrossRef]
19. Bruzzone, L.; Nodehi, S.E.; Fanghella, P. Tracked Locomotion Systems for Ground Mobile Robots: A Review. Machines 2022,
10, 648. [CrossRef]
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 34 of 37
20. Li, T.; Li, Q. A systematic review on load carriage assistive devices: Mechanism design and performance evaluation. Mech. Mach.
Theory 2023, 180, 105142. [CrossRef]
21. Chatterjee, P.; Lahiri, N.; Bhattacharjee, A.; Chakraborty, A. Automated Hybrid Stair Climber for Physically Challenged People.
In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Electronics, Materials Engineering & Nano-Technology (IEMENTech),
Kolkata, India, 24–26 September 2021; pp. 1–4.
22. JST (Japan Science and Technology Agency). News, Stories that Change the World: AMOEBA ENERGY (Amoeba-Inspired Technologies
to Change the Mobility); JST: Tokyo, Japan, 2020; Volume 3.
23. Tao, W.; Xu, J.; Liu, T. Electric-powered wheelchair with stair-climbing ability. Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 2017, 14, 1729881417721436.
[CrossRef]
24. Riener, R. The Cybathlon promotes the development of assistive technology for people with physical disabilities. J. Neuroeng.
Rehabil. 2016, 13, 49. [CrossRef]
25. Klöppel, M.; Römer, F.; Wittmann, M.; Hatam, B.; Herrmann, T.; Sim, L.L.; Lim, J.S.D.; Lu, Y.; Medovy, V.; Merkle, L.; et al.
Scube—Concept and Implementation of a Self-balancing, Autonomous Mobility Device for Personal Transport. World Electr. Veh.
2018, 9, 48. [CrossRef]
26. Lee, J.; Jeong, W.; Han, J.; Kim, T.; Oh, S. Barrier-Free Wheelchair with a Mechanical Transmission. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 5280.
[CrossRef]
27. Wang, J.; Wang, T.; Yao, C.; Li, X.; Wu, C. Active Tension Control for WT Wheelchair Robot by Using a Novel Control Law
for Holonomic or Nonholonomic Systems. In Mathematical Problems in Engineering; Hindawi Publishing Corporation: London,
UK, 2013.
28. Yu, S.; Wang, T. Original design of a wheelchair robot equipped with variable geometry single tracked mechanisms. Int. J. Robot.
Autom. 2015, 30, 87–97. [CrossRef]
29. Tao, W.; Jia, Y.; Liu, T.; Yi, J.; Wang, H.; Inoue, Y. A novel wheel-track hybrid electric powered wheelchair for stairs climbing.
J. Adv. Mech. Des. Syst. Manuf. 2016, 10, JAMDSM0060. [CrossRef]
30. Nakajima, S.; Sawada, S. Methodology of climbing and descending stairs for four-wheeled vehicles. In Proceedings of the IEEE
23rd International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Rhodes, Greece, 20–23 September 2020; pp. 1–6.
31. Meyer, J.T.; Weber, S.; Jäger, L. A survey on the influence of CYBATHLON on the development and acceptance of advanced
assistive technologies. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 2022, 19, 38. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
32. Popovic, M.B. Biomechatronics; Elsevier Science: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019.
33. Martínez, J.A.G.; Cardinale, F. Robotics in Neurosurgery: Principles and Practice, 1st ed.; Springer International Publishing:
Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022.
34. Podobnik, J.; Rejc, J.; Slajpah, S.; Munih, M.; Mihelj, M. All-Terrain Wheelchair: Increasing Personal Mobility with a Powered
Wheel-Track Hybrid Wheelchair. IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag. 2017, 24, 26–36. [CrossRef]
35. Uustal, H.; Minkel, J.L. Study of the independence IBOT 3000 mobility system: An innovative power mobility device, during use
in community environments. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2004, 85, 2002–2010. [CrossRef]
36. Onozuka, Y.; Tomokuni, N.; Murata, G.; Shino, M. Dynamic Stability Control of Inverted-Pendulum-Type Robotic Wheelchair for
Going Up and Down Stairs. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Las
Vegas, NV, USA, 24 October 2020–24 January 2021; pp. 4114–4119.
37. Quaglia, G.; Nisi, M. Design of a self-leveling cam mechanism for a stair climbing wheelchair. Mech. Mach. Theory 2017, 112,
38. Quaglia, G.; Franco, W.; Oderio, R. Wheelchair. q, a motorized wheelchair with stair climbing ability. Mech. Mach. Theory 2011, 11,
1601–1609. [CrossRef]
39. Castillo, B.D.; Kuo, Y.; Chou, J. Novel design of a wheelchair with stair climbing capabilities. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on Intelligent Informatics and Biomedical Sciences, Okinawa, Japan, 28–30 November 2015; pp. 208–215.
40. Wang, H.; He, L.; Qi, L. Research on a kind of leg-wheelstair-climbing wheelchair. In Proceedings of the IEEE International
Conference on Mechatronics and Automation, Tianjin, China, 3–6 August 2014.
41. Yuan, J.; Hirose, S. Research on leg-wheel hybrid stair-climbing robot, Zero Carrier. In Proceedings of the IEEE International
Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, Shenyang, China, 22–26 August 2004.
42. Yuan, J.; Hirose, S. Zero Carrier: A Novel Eight Leg-Wheels Hybrid Stair Climbing Mobile Vehicle. J. Robot. Mechatron. 2005, 17,
44–51. [CrossRef]
43. Cao, X.; Zhao, Q.; Ma, P. Humanoid Robot 3-D Motion Simulation for Hardware Realization. J. Donghua Univ. 2007, 24, 713–717.
44. Tang, J.; Zhao, Q.; Huang, J. Application of “human-in-the-loop” control to a biped walking-chair robot. In Proceedings of the
2007 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Montreal, QC, Canada, 7–10 October 2007.
45. Sugahara, Y. Towards the Biped Walking Wheelchair. In Proceedings of the First IEEE/RAS-EMBS International Conference on
Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronic, Pisa, Italy, 20–22 February 2006.
46. Zheng, C.; Zhao, Q.; Ma, P.; Zhang, H.; Gou, Z. Mechanism design of a biped walking-chair robot. Jiqiren/Robot 2006, 28, 297–302.
47. Lee, C.; Lee, K.; Yoo, J.; Kim, I.; Bang, Y. A compact stair-climbing wheelchair with two 3-DOF legs and a 1-DOF base. Ind. Robot
2016, 43, 181–192. [CrossRef]
48. Nakajima, S. Stair-climbing gait for a four-wheeled vehicle. Robomech J. 2020, 7, 20. [CrossRef]
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 35 of 37
49. Nakajima, S. Evaluation of the mobility performance of a personal mobility vehicle for steps. IEEE Access 2017, 5, 9748–9756.
[CrossRef]
50. Nakajima, S. RT-Mover: A rough terrain mobile robot with a simple leg–wheel hybrid mechanism. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2011, 13,
1609–1626. [CrossRef]
51. Chocoteco, J.; Morales, R.; Feliu-Batlle, V. Enhancing the Trajectory Generation of a Stair-Climbing Mobility System. Sensors 2017,
17, 2608. [CrossRef]
52. Lawn, J.M.; Ishimatsu, T. Modeling of a Stair-Climbing Wheelchair Mechanism with High Single-Step Capability. IEEE Trans.
Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 2003, 3, 323–332. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
53. Sugahara, Y.; Yonezawa, N.; Kosuge, K. A novel stair-climbing wheelchair with transformable wheeled four-bar linkages. In
Proceedings of the IEEE 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Taipei, Taiwan, 18–22
October 2010.
54. Uchida, Y.; Furuichi, K.; Hirose, S. Fundamental performance of a 6 wheeled off-road vehicle “HELIOS-V”. In Proceedings of the
1999 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Detroit, MI, USA, 10–15 May 1999; Volume 3, pp. 2336–2341.
55. Chen, C.; Pham, H. Design and fabrication of a statically stable stair-climbing robotic wheelchair. Ind. Robot. Int. J. 2009, 6,
56. RPWheel Project for Cybathlon. Available online: https://sites.google.com/osakac.ac.jp/rpwheel/cybathlon2020?authuser=0
(accessed on 15 April 2023).
57. Zhang, H.; Yang, S.; Chen, X.; Lu, X.; Wang, Y. Final Design Review: Stair-Climbing Machine. 2016. Available online: https:
//docs.google.com/document/d/1W2TeU4i8153FuLejfbfsoq7PUXol_FTQb_bXV0Blf7k/edit (accessed on 15 April 2023).
58. Mourikis, A.I.; Trawny, N.; Roumeliotis, S.I.; Helmick, D.M.; Matthies, L. Autonomous Stair Climbing for Tracked Vehicles. Int. J.
Robot. Res. 2007, 7, 737–758. [CrossRef]
59. Yoneda, K.; Ota, Y.; Hirose, S. Development of a Hi-Grip Stair Climbing Crawler with Hysteresis Compliant Blocks. In Proceedings
of the 4th International Conference on Climbing and Walking Robots, Karlsruhe, Germany, September 2001; pp. 569–576.
60. Hirose, S.; Sensu, T. The TAQT Carrier: A Practical Terrain Adaptive Quadru-track Carrier Robot. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ
International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Raleigh, NC, USA, 7–10 July 1992; pp. 2068–2073.
61. Hirose, S.; Fukushima, E.F.; Damoto, R.; Nakamoto, H. Design of terrain adaptive versatile crawler vehicle HELIOS-VI. In
Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Maui, HI, USA, 29 October–3 November
2001; Volume 3, pp. 1540–1545.
62. Thamel, S.R.; Munasinghe, R.; Lalitharatne, T. Motion Planning of Novel Stair-Climbing Wheelchair for Elderly and Disabled
People. In Proceedings of the Moratuwa Engineering Research Conference, Moratuwa, Sri Lanka, 28–30 July 2020; pp. 590–595.
63. Rehman, B.U.; Caldwell, D.G.; Semini, C. Centaur robots—A survey. In Human-Centric Robotics: Proceedings of the CLAWAR 2017:
20th International Conference on Climbing and Walking Robots and the Support Technologies for Mobile Machines, Porto, Portugal, 11–13
September 2017; World Scientific: Singapore, 2017; pp. 247–258.
64. Ugenti, A.; Galati, R.; Mantriota, G.; Reina, G. Analysis of an all-terrain tracked robot with innovative suspension system. Mech.
65. Htoo, P.T. Development of a Stair-Climbing Robot; Asian Institute of Technology: Khlong Nueng, Thailand, 2016.
66. Ruiqin, L.; Kaitong, X.; Shijie, L.; Jianwei, Z. Object Loading Robot Which Can Move as well as Climb Stairs. China Patent
CN107640235A, 30 January 2018.
67. Dongsheng, I.; Congying, L. Multi-Mode Driving Crawler-Type Electric Carrying Device and Method. China Patent
CN111547145A, 18 August 2020.
68. Deshmukh, S.H.; Yadav, D.; Chowalloor, B. Development of stair climbing transporter. In Proceedings of the 13th National
Conference on Mechanisms and Machines, Bangalore, India, 12–13 December 2007.
69. Wen, H.; Yang, H.; Chen, Y.; Zhou, L.; Wu, D. A Robot with Decoupled Mechanical Structure and Adapted State Machine Control
for Both Ground and Staircase Situations. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 5185. [CrossRef]
70. Okada, T.; Botelho, W.T.; Shimizu, T. Motion Analysis with Experimental Verification of the Hybrid Robot PEOPLER-II for
Reversible Switch between Walk- and Roll-on Demand. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2010, 29, 1199–1221. [CrossRef]
71. Okada, T.; Mahmoud, A.; Botelho, W.T.; Shimizu, T. Trajectory Estimation of a Skid-Steering Mobile Robot Propelled by
Independently Driven Wheels. Robotica 2012, 30, 123–132. [CrossRef]
72. Shihua, J. Multi-Road-Condition Vertical Movement Transporting Device and Transporting Method. China Patent CN106394721A,
15 February 2017.
73. Yeping, L.; Yong, X. A Multistep Attitude Conveying Robot for Takeaway Food Delivery. China Patent CN208278190U, 25
December 2018.
74. Yinhui, Z.; Yuyan, L.; Sen, W.; Zifen, H. Climb Stair Robot. China Patent CN207579987U, 6 July 2018.
75. Lee, W.; Kang, S.; Kim, M.; Park, M. ROBHAZ-DT3: Teleoperated mobile platform with passively adaptive double-track for
hazardous environment applications. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems,
Sendai, Japan, 28 September–2 October 2004.
76. Ben-Tzvi, P.; Ito, S.; Goldenberg, A.A. Autonomous Stair Climbing with Reconfigurable Tracked Mobile Robot. In Proceedings of
the 2007 International Workshop on Robotic and Sensors Environments, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 12–13 October 2007; pp. 1–6.
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 36 of 37
77. Vu, Q.; Kim, B.; Song, J. Autonomous stair climbing algorithm for a small four-tracked robot. In Proceedings of the 2008
International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 14–17 October 2008; pp. 2356–2360.
78. Moosavian, A.; Semsarilar, H.; Kalantari, A. Design and Manufacturing of a Mobile Rescue Robot. In Proceedings of the 2006
IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Beijing, China, 9–13 October 2006; pp. 3982–3987.
79. Michaud, F.; Létourneau, D.; Arsenault, M.; Bergeron, Y.; Cadrin, R.; Gagnon, F.; Legault, M.; Millette, M.; Paré, J.; Tremblay, M.;
et al. AZIMUT, a leg-track-wheel robot. In Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and
Systems (IROS 2003), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 27–31 October 2003.
80. Mohammad, I.; Emir, I.; Ibraahiim, J.; Juniza, M.D.S.; Mastura, S. Mechanical design and development of Tri-Star wheel system
for stair climbing robot. In Proceedings of the Aceh Development International Conference, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 26–28
March 2012.
81. Smith, L.M.; Quinn, R.D.; Johnson, K.A.; Tuck, W.R. The Tri-Wheel: A novel wheel-leg mobility concept. In Proceedings of the
2015 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Hamburg, Germany, 28 September–3 October 2015;
pp. 4146–4152.
82. Eich, M.; Grimminger, F.; Bosse, S.; Spenneberg, D.; Kirchner, F. Asguard: A Hybrid-Wheel Security and SAR-Robot Using
Bio-Inspired Locomotion for Rough Terrain. Proc. ROBIO 2007, 20082008, 774–779.
83. Eich, A.M.; Grimminger, F.; Kirchner, F. A Versatile Stair-Climbing Robot for Search and Rescue Applications. In Proceedings of
the IEEE International Workshop on Safety, Security and Rescue Robotics, Sendai, Japan, 21–24 October 2008; pp. 35–40.
84. Krys, V.; Bobovský, Z.; Kot, T.; Marek, J. Synthesis of action variable for motor controllers of a mobile system with special wheels
for movement on stairs. Perspect. Sci. 2016, 7, 329–332. [CrossRef]
85. Mostyn, V.; Krys, V.; Kot, T.; Bobovsky, Z.; Novak, P. The synthesis of a segmented stair-climbing wheel. Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst.
2018, 15, 1729881417749470. [CrossRef]
86. Herbert, S.D.; Drenner, A.; Papanikolopoulos, N. Loper: A quadruped-hybrid stair climbing robot. In Proceedings of the 2008
IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Pasadena, CA, USA, 19–23 May 2008; pp. 799–804.
87. Choe, J.; Kwon, U.; Nah, M.C.; Kim, H. Design Analysis of TuskBot: Universal Stair Climbing 4-Wheel Indoor Robot. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 24–28 September 2017.
88. Kim, D.; Hong, H.; Kim, H.S.; Kim, J. Optimal design and kinetic analysis of a stair-climbing mobile robot with rocker-bogie
mechanism. Mech. Mach. Theory 2012, 50, 90–108. [CrossRef]
89. Choi, D.; Kim, J.R.; Cho, S.; Jung, S.; Kim, J. Rocker-Pillar: Design of the rough terrain mobile robot platform with caterpillar
tracks and rocker bogie mechanism. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and
Systems, Vilamoura, Portugal, 7–12 October 2012; pp. 3405–3410.
90. Lauria, M.; Piguet, Y.; Siegwart, R. Octopus—An Autonomous Wheeled Climbing Robot. In Proceedings of the Fifth International
Conference on Climbing and Walking Robots, Paris, France, 25–27 September 2002.
91. Bruzzone, L.; Baggetta, M.; Nodehi, S.E.; Bilancia, P.; Fanghella, P. Functional Design of a Hybrid Leg-Wheel-Track Ground
Mobile Robot. Machines 2021, 9, 10. [CrossRef]
92. Bruzzone, L.; Fanghella, P. Mantis hybrid leg-wheel robot: Stability analysis and motion law synthesis for step climbing. In
Proceedings of the IEEE/ASME 10th International Conference on Mechatronic and Embedded Systems and Applications,
Senigallia, Italy, 10–12 September 2014; pp. 1–6.
93. Mabuchi, T.; Nagasawa, T.; Awa, K. Development of a stair-climbing mobile robot with legs and wheels. Artif. Life Robot. 1998, 2,
94. Takanishi, A.; Takeya, T.; Kato, H.K.I. A control method for dynamic biped walking under unknown external force. In Proceedings
of the IEEE International Workshop on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Towards a New Frontier of Applications, Piscatway, NJ,
USA, 3–6 July 1990; Volume 2, pp. 795–801.
95. Zhang, R.X.; Vadakkepat, P. Motion planning of biped robot climbing stairs. Proc. FIRA Congr. 2003. Available online:
http://ai.stanford.edu/~rxzhang/Motion%20Planning%20of%20Biped%20Robot%20Climbing.pdf (accessed on 15 April 2023).
96. Gong, Y.; Hartley, R.; Da, X.; Hereid, A.; Harib, O.; Huang, J.; Grizzle, J. Feedback Control of a Cassie Bipedal Robot: Walking,
Standing, and Riding a Segway. In Proceedings of the 2019 American Control Conference, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 10–12 July 2019.
97. Dai, M.; Xiong, X.; Ames, A. Bipedal Walking on Constrained Footholds: Momentum Regulation via Vertical COM Control.
In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 23–27 May 2022;
pp. 10435–10441.
98. Chen, S.; Huang, K.J.; Li, C.; Lin, P. Trajectory planning for stair climbing in the leg-wheel hybrid mobile robot quattroped.
In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Shanghai, China, 9–13 May 2011;
pp. 1229–1234.
99. Chen, S.; Huang, K.J.; Chen, W.H.; Shen, S.Y.; Li, C.H.; Lin, P. Quattroped: A Leg-Wheel Transformable Robot. IEEE/ASME Trans.
Mechatron. 2014, 2, 730–742. [CrossRef]
100. Liu, C.; Lin, M.; Huang, Y.; Pai, T.; Wang, C. The development of a multi-legged robot using eight-bar linkages as leg mechanisms
with switchable modes for walking and stair climbing. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Control, Automation
and Robotics, Nagoya, Japan, 22–24 April 2017; pp. 103–108.
Robotics 2023, 12, 74 37 of 37
101. Bledt, G.; Powell, M.J.; Katz, B.; Di Carlo, J.; Wensing, P.M.; Kim, S. MIT Cheetah 3: Design and Control of a Robust, Dynamic
Quadruped Robot. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Madrid, Spain,
1–5 October 2018.
102. Bouman, A. Autonomous Spot: Long-Range Autonomous Exploration of Extreme Environments with Legged Locomotion.
In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 24 October
2020–24 January 2021; pp. 2518–2525.
103. Hutter, M.; Gehring, C.; Jud, D.; Lauber, A.; Bellicoso, C.D.; Tsounis, V.; Hwangbo, J.; Bodie, K.; Fankhauser, P.; Bloesch, M.;
et al. ANYmal—A highly mobile and dynamic quadrupedal robot. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on
Intelligent Robots and Systems, Daejeon, Republic of Korea, 9–14 October 2016; pp. 38–44.
104. Lu, D.; Dong, E.; Liu, C.; Xu, M.; Yang, J. Design and development of a leg-wheel hybrid robot “HyTRo-I”. In Proceedings of the
IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Tokyo, Japan, 3–7 November 2013; pp. 6031–6036.
105. Labib, O.; El-Safty, S.; Mueller, S.; Haalboom, T.; Strand, M. Towards a Stair Climbing Robot System Based on a Re-configurable
Linkage Mechanism. Intell. Auton. Syst. 2018, 15, 278–288.
106. Moore, E.Z.; Campbell, D.; Grimminger, F.; Buehler, M. Reliable Stair Climbing in Simple Hexapod ‘RHex’. In Proceedings
of the 2002 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Washington, DC, USA, 11–15 May 2002; Volume 3,
pp. 2222–2227.
107. Klemm, V. Ascento: A two-wheeled jumping robot. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Robotics and
Automation, Montreal, QC, Canada, 20–24 May 2019; pp. 7515–7521.
108. Binnard, M.B. Design of a Small Pneumatic Walking Robot. Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA,
USA, 1995.
109. Dudek, G.; Jenkin, M. Computational Principles of Mobile Robotics; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2010.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Robotics 12 00074 v2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Robotics 12 00074 v2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

robotics

Dipartimento di Meccanica, Matematica e Management, Politecnico di Bari, 70126 Bari, Italy;

Robotics 2023, 12, 74. https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics12030074 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/robotics

Robotics 2023, 12, 74 Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 45

Scewo Bro [25]

Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 45

ZED evolution Prototype solution, manual

software control, high speed

Prototype solution, automatic

Podobnik linkage mechanism for lifting

Most of the solutions [25,26,29,30,33,34] use wheels as preferred locomotion mode on

Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 43

Table 2.Name Solution

Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 45

Prototype solution, au-

Prototype solution, au-

Prototype solution, automatic

Lawn [52]. Adapted Prototype solution, au-

HELIOS-V [54]. Prototype solution,

In general, they use a wheel or wheels mounted on a structure whose position

3.2. Carrier Type Robots

Table 5. Track-based carrier

Prototype solution, manual

TAQT Carrier [60].

Robotics 2023, 12, 74 10 of 37

Table 7. Hybrid and leg-based carrier type robots list.

Prototype solution, au-

Prototype solution, au-

Table 8. Track-based robots

Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 45

Name Solution Features

Silver [78]. Adapted Prototype Prototype solution, mobile

Robotics 2023, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 45

Name Solution Features

Mantis [92]. Adapted with Mantis [92].

Table 11. Cont.

Name Solution Features

Table 12. Quadruped-based robots list.

Liu [100]. Adapted

Table 12. Cont.

Reference Solution Features

Table 14. Wheeled-based robots list.

4. Analysis and Comparison

Robotics 2023, 12, 74 20 of 37

10. Payload Capacity—Normalized speed scatter plot.

Figure 11. Normalized Work Capability—Payload Capacity scatter plot.

So, from the

Figure 16. 16.

Table A1. Robot’s Payload Capacity.

Name Type Category PC [%] Payload/Robot

Table A2. Robot’s Normalized Speed.

Name Type Category NS [s−1 ] Speed/Length

Table A2. Cont.

Name Type Category NS [s−1 ] Speed/Length

Table A3. Robot’s Normalized Work Capability.

Name Type Category NWC[s−1 ]

Table A3. Cont.

Name Type Category NWC[s−1 ]

Table A4. Crossable step height and stairs slope.

Name Type Category Step Height [cm] Stairs Slope [◦ ]

Table A4. Cont.

Name Type Category Step Height [cm] Stairs Slope [◦ ]

Table A5. Transport Ability values.