How researchers are innovating smarter wearable tech

In the world of soft robotics and wearable technology, sheet-based fluidic devices are revolutionizing how lightweight, flexible and multifunctional systems are designed. But with innovation comes challenges, particularly in understanding and controlling failure in these devices.

A new study by mechanical engineers at Rice University’s George R. Brown School of Engineering and Computing explores how programmed failure in heat-sealable, sheet-based systems can be used to protect devices, enable complex sequencing of actions and even streamline control mechanisms.

“Put simply, we are making soft, flexible machines smarter by designing their internal components to fail intentionally in a well-understood manner,” said Daniel J. Preston, corresponding author and assistant professor of mechanical engineering. “In doing so, the resulting systems can recover from pressure surges and even complete multiple tasks using a single control input.”

The research, published in Cell Reports Physical Science, focuses on how thin, flexible sheets—patterned and selectively bonded to form internal fluidic networks—respond to pressure changes, and specifically, how they fail when internal pressures get too high. By studying adhesion between textile sheets, the research team was able to predict maximum operating pressures and determine how factors like bond geometry and material selection impact performance.

“Our study provides a framework for predicting and leveraging failure in sheet-based fluidic systems,” said Sofia Urbina, co-first author of the study, second-year doctoral student in Preston’s lab and a GEM Associate Fellow. “Rather than seeing failure as a limitation, we explored how it can be used to enhance functionality, making these devices more intelligent and efficient.”

Through rigorous testing, including T-peel tests to evaluate adhesion strength and burst tests to assess failure at elevated pressures, the researchers identified three distinct failure regimes dictated by the thermal bonding step of the manufacturing process: an initial phase where bond strength increases with bonding temperature, a plateau where material strength dictates cohesive failure, and a third phase where overheating during fabrication degrades material integrity.

These findings allowed the researchers to engineer a novel “fluidic fuse”—a protective component that relies on multiple bonds with different strengths and is designed to fail in a controlled manner to prevent damage from pressure spikes. This component, the researchers said, was one of the most exciting outcomes of the study.

“Think of it like an electrical fuse,” said Preston. “When the pressure exceeds a set limit, the fuse ‘blows,’ preventing catastrophic damage to the entire system. This fluidic fuse can be easily replaced or even rebonded for reuse.”

Beyond protection, the team demonstrated that these fuses could be strategically placed to sequence multiple actions within a device. For example, in one experiment, a system was designed to first unscrew a light bulb then lift it out of a socket—all using a single pressure input.

“By programming when and where failure occurs, we can create devices that ‘fail’ their way into new operating modes, performing multiple tasks without needing additional control inputs,” Preston said.

The applications for these findings extend far beyond the lab. In wearable technology, fluidic networks could be embedded into clothing, offering adaptive support for rehabilitation patients, assisting individuals with mobility impairments and even communicating with our sense of touch. In robotics, the ability to sequence actions with a single input could simplify the design of multifunctional autonomous systems, reducing the need for complex electronic control mechanisms.

“This research allows for smarter, more responsive sheet-based fluidic devices,” said co-first author Adam Broshkevitch, who graduated from Rice with a Master of Science in mechanical engineering last spring and is now in the Air Force. “By embracing failure as a tool rather than a drawback, we can build systems that are not only more resilient but also more capable.”