Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

A dynamically reprogrammable surface with self-evolving shape morphing

Nature volume 609, pages 701–708 (2022)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Dynamic shape-morphing soft materials systems are ubiquitous in living organisms; they are also of rapidly increasing relevance to emerging technologies in soft machines1,2,3, flexible electronics4,5 and smart medicines6. Soft matter equipped with responsive components can switch between designed shapes or structures, but cannot support the types of dynamic morphing capabilities needed to reproduce natural, continuous processes of interest for many applications7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24. Challenges lie in the development of schemes to reprogram target shapes after fabrication, especially when complexities associated with the operating physics and disturbances from the environment can stop the use of deterministic theoretical models to guide inverse design and control strategies25,26,27,28,29,30. Here we present a mechanical metasurface constructed from a matrix of filamentary metal traces, driven by reprogrammable, distributed Lorentz forces that follow from the passage of electrical currents in the presence of a static magnetic field. The resulting system demonstrates complex, dynamic morphing capabilities with response times within 0.1 second. Implementing an in situ stereo-imaging feedback strategy with a digitally controlled actuation scheme guided by an optimization algorithm yields surfaces that can follow a self-evolving inverse design to morph into a wide range of three-dimensional target shapes with high precision, including an ability to morph against extrinsic or intrinsic perturbations. These concepts support a data-driven approach to the design of dynamic soft matter, with many unique characteristics.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Mechanical metasurfaces driven by reprogrammable electromagnetic actuation.
Fig. 2: Model-driven inverse design of the metasurfaces for dynamic, complex shape morphing.
Fig. 3: The experiment-driven self-evolving process in comparison with the model-driven approach.
Fig. 4: Self-evolving shape morphing against extrinsic or intrinsic perturbations.
Fig. 5: Self-evolving shape morphing towards semi-real-time shape learning and multifunctionality.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data are contained within the manuscript. Raw data are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request.

Code availability

The codes that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Rafsanjani, A., Bertoldi, K. & Studart, A. R. Programming soft robots with flexible mechanical metamaterials. Sci. Robot. 4, eaav7874 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. McEvoy, M. A. & Correll, N. Materials that couple sensing, actuation, computation, and communication. Science 347, 1261689 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Morin, S. A. et al. Camouflage and display for soft machines. Science 337, 828–832 (2012).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wang, C., Wang, C., Huang, Z. & Xu, S. Materials and structures toward soft electronics. Adv. Mater. 30, 1801368 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Rogers, J. A., Someya, T. & Huang, Y. Materials and mechanics for stretchable electronics. Science 327, 1603–1607 (2010).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cianchetti, M., Laschi, C., Menciassi, A. & Dario, P. Biomedical applications of soft robotics. Nat. Rev. Mater. 3, 143–153 (2018).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. Boley, J. W., Rees, W., Lissandrello, C., Horenstein, M. N. & Mahadevan, L. Shape-shifting structured lattices via multimaterial 4D printing. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 201908806 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Liu, K., Hacker, F. & Daraio, C. Robotic surfaces with reversible, spatiotemporal control for shape morphing and object manipulation. Sci. Robot. 6, eabf5116 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Guo, Y., Zhang, J., Hu, W., Khan, M. T. A. & Sitti, M. Shape-programmable liquid crystal elastomer structures with arbitrary three-dimensional director fields and geometries. Nat. Commun. 12, 5936 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Hajiesmaili, E. & Clarke, D. R. Reconfigurable shape-morphing dielectric elastomers using spatially varying electric fields. Nat. Commun. 10, 183 (2019).

    Article  ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Gladman, A. S., Matsumoto, E. A., Nuzzo, R. G., Mahadevan, L. & Lewis, J. A. Biomimetic 4D printing. Nat. Mater. 15, 413–418 (2016).

    Article  ADS  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Yu, C. et al. Electronically programmable, reversible shape change in two‐and three‐dimensional hydrogel structures. Adv. Mater. 25, 1541–1546 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zhang, H., Guo, X., Wu, J., Fang, D. & Zhang, Y. Soft mechanical metamaterials with unusual swelling behavior and tunable stress-strain curves. Sci. Adv. 4, eaar8535 (2018).

    Article  ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Li, S. et al. Liquid-induced topological transformations of cellular microstructures. Nature 592, 386–391 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pikul, J. et al. Stretchable surfaces with programmable 3D texture morphing for synthetic camouflaging skins. Science 358, 210–214 (2017).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Barnes, M. et al. Reactive 3D printing of shape-programmable liquid crystal elastomer actuators. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 12, 28692–28699 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ford, M. J. et al. A multifunctional shape-morphing elastomer with liquid metal inclusions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 21438–21444 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Alapan, Y., Karacakol, A. C., Guzelhan, S. N., Isik, I. & Sitti, M. Reprogrammable shape morphing of magnetic soft machines. Sci. Adv. 6, eabc6414 (2020).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Kim, Y., Yuk, H., Zhao, R., Chester, S. A. & Zhao, X. Printing ferromagnetic domains for untethered fast-transforming soft materials. Nature 558, 274–279 (2018).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cui, J. et al. Nanomagnetic encoding of shape-morphing micromachines. Nature 575, 164–168 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ze, Q. et al. Magnetic shape memory polymers with integrated multifunctional shape manipulation. Adv. Mater. 32, 1906657 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Mao, G. et al. Soft electromagnetic actuators. Sci. Adv. 6, eabc0251 (2020).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Zhang, F. et al. Rapidly deployable and morphable 3D mesostructures with applications in multimodal biomedical devices. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2026414118 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Xia, X. et al. Electrochemically reconfigurable architected materials. Nature 573, 205–213 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fan, Z. et al. Inverse design strategies for 3D surfaces formed by mechanically guided assembly. Adv. Mater. 32, 1908424 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Choi, G. P., Dudte, L. H. & Mahadevan, L. Programming shape using kirigami tessellations. Nat. Mater. 18, 999–1004 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bossart, A., Dykstra, D. M., van der Laan, J. & Coulais, C. Oligomodal metamaterials with multifunctional mechanics. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2018610118 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Baek, C., Martin, A. G., Poincloux, S., Chen, T. & Reis, P. M. Smooth triaxial weaving with naturally curved ribbons. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 104301 (2021).

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Coulais, C., Sabbadini, A., Vink, F. & van Hecke, M. Multi-step self-guided pathways for shape-changing metamaterials. Nature 561, 512–515 (2018).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Guseinov, R., McMahan, C., Pérez, J., Daraio, C. & Bickel, B. Programming temporal morphing of self-actuated shells. Nat. Commun. 11, 237 (2020).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Kaspar, C., Ravoo, B. J., van der Wiel, W. G., Wegner, S. V. & Pernice, W. H. P. The rise of intelligent matter. Nature 594, 345–355 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Hu, W., Lum, G. Z., Mastrangeli, M. & Sitti, M. Small-scale soft-bodied robot with multimodal locomotion. Nature 554, 81–85 (2018).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Overvelde, J. T., Weaver, J. C., Hoberman, C. & Bertoldi, K. Rational design of reconfigurable prismatic architected materials. Nature 541, 347–352 (2017).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Waters, J. T. et al. Twist again: dynamically and reversibly controllable chirality in liquid crystalline elastomer microposts. Sci. Adv. 6, eaay5349 (2020).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang, Y. et al. Repeatable and reprogrammable shape morphing from photoresponsive gold nanorod/liquid crystal elastomers. Adv. Mater. 32, 2004270 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Xu, C., Yang, Z. & Lum, G. Z. Small-scale magnetic actuators with optimal six degrees-of-freedom programming temporal morphing of self-actuated shells. Adv. Mater. 33, 2100170 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Phelan, M. F. III, Tiryaki, M. E., Lazovic, J., Gilbert, H. & Sitti, M. Heat‐mitigated design and lorentz force‐based steering of an MRI‐driven microcatheter toward minimally invasive surgery. Adv. Sci. 9, 2105352 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Kotikian, A. et al. Innervated, self‐sensing liquid crystal elastomer actuators with closed loop control. Adv. Mater. 33, 2101814 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Wang, X. et al. Freestanding 3D mesostructures, functional devices, and shape-programmable systems based on mechanically induced assembly with shape memory polymers. Adv. Mater. 31, 1805615 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Wang, Y., Li, L., Hofmann, D., Andrade, J. E. & Daraio, C. Structured fabrics with tunable mechanical properties. Nature 596, 238–243 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Zhang, B. et al. Short-term oscillation and falling dynamics for a water drop dripping in quiescent air. Phys. Rev. Fluids 4, 123604 (2019).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  42. Tang, C. et al. Dynamics of droplet impact on solid surface with different roughness. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 96, 56–69 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Y.B., Y.P. and Xiaoyue Ni acknowledge funding support from the Pratt School of Engineering and School of Medicine at Duke University. Y.H. acknowledges support from the NSF (grant no. CMMI 16-35443). This work was performed in part at the Duke University Shared Materials Instrumentation Facility, a member of the North Carolina Research Triangle Nanotechnology Network, which is supported by the National Science Foundation (award no. ECCS-2025064) as part of the National Nanotechnology Coordinated Infrastructure. Xiaoyue Ni thanks L. Bridgeman, J. Lu and Z. Wang for helpful discussions.

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Yun Bai, Heling Wang

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

    Yun Bai, Yuxin Pan & Xiaoyue Ni

  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

    Heling Wang, Yeguang Xue, Yonggang Huang & John A. Rogers

  3. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

    Heling Wang, Yeguang Xue, Yiyuan Yang, Yonggang Huang & John A. Rogers

  4. Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

    Heling Wang, Yeguang Xue, Yonggang Huang & John A. Rogers

  5. Laboratory of Flexible Electronics Technology, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China

    Heling Wang

  6. Institute of Flexible Electronics Technology of THU Jiaxing, Zhejiang, China

    Heling Wang

  7. Querrey Simpson Institute for Bioelectronics, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

    Jin-Tae Kim, Xinchen Ni, Tzu-Li Liu, Mengdi Han, Yonggang Huang, John A. Rogers & Xiaoyue Ni

  8. Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Future Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China

    Mengdi Han

  9. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

    John A. Rogers

  10. Department of Neurological Surgery, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA

    John A. Rogers

  11. Department of Chemistry, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

    John A. Rogers

  12. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

    John A. Rogers

  13. Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

    Xiaoyue Ni

Authors
  1. Yun Bai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Heling Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yeguang Xue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yuxin Pan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jin-Tae Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Xinchen Ni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Tzu-Li Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yiyuan Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Mengdi Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Yonggang Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. John A. Rogers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Xiaoyue Ni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Y.B., H.W., Y.H., J.A.R. and Xiaoyue Ni conceived the idea and designed the research. Y.B. and Y.Y. fabricated the samples. Y.B., Y.X., Y.P., J.-T.K., Xinchen Ni, T.-L.L., M.H. and Xiaoyue Ni performed the experiments. H.W. and Y.H. performed the finite-element modelling and theoretical study. Y.B. and Xiaoyue Ni analysed the experimental data. Y.B., H.W., Y.H., J.A.R. and Xiaoyue Ni wrote the manuscript, with input from all co-authors.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Heling Wang, Yonggang Huang, John A. Rogers or Xiaoyue Ni.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature thanks Guo Zhan Lum and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Fig. 1 The analytical model of the electromagnetic response of a serpentine beam corroborated by FEA study and experimental characterizations.

a, Schematic illustration (top and cross-sectional views) of the initial state of a serpentine beam (beam width H = 1.20 mm, serpentine period λ = 0.18 mm). b, Analytical model and FEA prediction of the maximum out-of-plane displacement u dependent on the combination of electric current I, magnetic field B, and material and geometry parameters. c, Schematic illustration of a single beam, placed in a magnetic field B and carrying a current density J with an out-of-plane displacement u, under an electromagnetic force FEM = J × B. d, Optical images of a representative serpentine beam (side view) driven to the maximum displacement u. If exceeding the elastic limit, an irreversible deformation u’ will remain after unloading. e–g, Experimental characterizations of mechanical (e, f) and thermal (g) behaviors of a single beam under current-controlled electromagnetic actuation (B = 224 mT) in comparison with the theoretical predictions. Scale bar, 1 mm.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Experimental validation of the scaling law using a single serpentine beam.

a, Top-view optical images of serpentine beams with the same beam length (L = 11 mm) but different beam widths (H = 0.84 mm, 1.20 mm, 1.56 mm). In a magnetic field of 224 mT, current-controlled experiments show that the electromagnetic responses of the beams with various PI thicknesses (hPI = 5.0 μm, 7.5 μm, 12.0 μm) agree with the analytical solutions. b, Experimentally measured electromagnetic responses follow the scaling law predicted by the analytical model. c, Side-view optical images of a serpentine beam of the design presented in the main text (H = 1.20 mm, hPI = 7.5 μm) actuated in a magnetic field of 224 mT (left) and a tailored serpentine beam (H = 1.56 mm, hPI = 5.0 μm) actuated in a reduced magnetic field of 25 mT (right). Applying the same current (15 mA) deforms the two beams to the same height (around 2.25 mm). d, The two beams in (c) exhibit approximately the same current-controlled mechanical behavior. Scale bars, 1 mm.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Shape morphing in time-varying, non-uniform magnetic fields.

a, Schematic illustration of a single serpentine beam in a non-uniform magnetic field generated by a small disk magnet (diameter D = 11.0 mm, thickness h = 5.0 mm, surface field B = 481.6 mT) moving 3-mm below the beam (ΔZ = −3 mm). b, c, Optical images of the beam (applied current I = 20 mA) changing shapes as the position of the magnet changes along X-axis (b, ΔY = 0) and Y-axis (c, ΔX = 0). Scale bars, 1 mm. d, Schematic illustration of a 4 × 4 sample in a non-uniform magnetic field generated by a pair of large magnets (D = 76.2 mm, h = 12.7 mm, surface field B = 245.1 mT) and a small magnet (D = 11.0 mm, h = 5.0 mm, surface field B = 481.6 mT) in the middle, 3.0 mm below the center of the sample. e, Magnetic flux density in X-direction (BX) of the approximately uniform/non-uniform field measured by a gaussmeter (GMHT201, Apex Magnets) with/without the presence of the small magnet across the center (O) along X-axis (left) and Y-axis (right). f, Experimental results (optical images and 3D reconstructed surfaces) of a 4×4 sample morphing into the same donut-like target shape via the experiment-driven self-evolving process in the uniform and the non-uniform magnetic field. Scale bars, 5 mm.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Typical descent of loss function over function evaluations.

a–c, For a 4×4 sample morphing into Shape I (a), III (b), IV (c) (Supplementary Note 8) through the experiment-driven approach using the gradient-based algorithm (see Methods section ‘Optimization algorithm’), the experimentally-measured loss function f(V) (with an initial value f(V = 0) in the range of 0.05-0.35) descends by ~99.5% to a steady state in 170–510 function evaluations (5-15 iterations). The 3D imaging noise is δu = 0.016 mm (Supplementary Note 14). d–f, Comparison of a global solver (pattern search algorithm) with the gradient-based algorithm for a 4×4 sample morphing into Shape IV using model-driven simulation. Subjecting the objective function to typical experimental noise (δu = 0.016 mm, Supplementary Note 14) and targeting a final loss of 0.005f(V = 0), the gradient-based algorithm finds the solution faster than the global solver (d). Both algorithms settle to a minimum loss of 0.0006f(V = 0) within 20,000 function evaluations (e). With pronounced noise (δu = 0.16 mm), the gradient descent method ends up with a local solution (0.08f(V = 0)), while the pattern search method finds the same minimum (0.0006f(V = 0)) as the case with low noise (f).

Extended Data Fig. 5 Experiment-driven self-evolving process in comparison with the model-driven approach.

a, Target explicit shapes and optical images of the experiment-driven morphing results of a 4×4 sample. b, 3D reconstructed surfaces overlaid with contour plots of the minimized errors. c, Histogram plots of the minimized errors for model-driven and experiment-driven outputs. Scale bars, 5 mm.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Simulation of the impact of experimental noise on the optimization process.

a, Comparison between the distribution of final loss f0 after 15 iterations from model-driven simulations (1,000 trials, given 3D imaging noise δu = 0.016 mm, 12-bit PWM output, and maximum current Imax = 27 mA) versus that from the experiments (97 trials), for a 4×4 sample morphing into the target shape in Fig. 3b. b, Simulation results of the final loss f0 (without imaging noise and iteration constraint) given n-bit PWM voltage control, compared with the case without actuation noise (continuous, analog voltage control). c–f, Histogram plots of the final loss f0 (1,000 simulation trials) with a decreasing 3D imaging noise δu = 0.024 mm (c), 0.016 mm (d), 0.008 mm (e) and 0.004 mm (f).

Extended Data Fig. 7 The optical images of a 2 × 2 sample with modified serpentine design for amplified nonlinear mechanical behavior in response to a range of actuation voltages.

a–d, Side-view images of the sample deforming out-of-plane given an increasing voltage to port 1 (Fig. 4a) given V1 = 0 V (a), 0.25 V (b), 2.75 V (c), and 3 V (d), respectively. The rate of change of u1 decreases as the actuation voltage increases. Scale bar, 5 mm.

Extended Data Fig. 8 Self-evolving shape morphing toward semi-real-time shape learning.

a, Schematic illustration of a duplicated stereo-imaging setup enabling a semi-real-time control of a 4×4 sample simulating the dynamic shape-shifting of a palm surface with 4×4 markers (with inter-spacing a0 = 15 mm). b, Experimental results of the continuous semi-real-time shape learning of the palm surface with the thumb moving up. c, Morphing results of representative frames from a recording of hand making eight gestures. Scale bars, 5 mm.

Extended Data Fig. 9 A 3×3 reflective sample self-evolving to achieve an optical and a structural function simultaneously.

a, Representative optical images of the laser spots on the receiving screen. The target optical function is to overlap two laser spots on the receiving screen. A customized image analysis method detects the centroid coordinates of the red/green laser spots to monitor their current locations on the screen ([xr/g, yr/g]). b, The typical evolution of loss functions (Supplementary Note 16) over number of functional evaluations. The optimized loss function (fmulti(V)) is a linear combination of two parts: I) an optical loss function fopt(V) that evaluates the distance between the center of the two laser spots; II) a structural loss function fstruct(V) that evaluates the central nodal displacement error. Scale bar, 5 mm.

Extended Data Fig. 10 Allowed shape (structural function) configurations of a 3×3 sample enforcing only the optical function (Fig. 5c, d).

a, Allowed values of the central nodal displacement (u5) when the sample overlaps the beams (when the distance between the centroids of the laser spots is less than 0.1 mm) with three distinctive incident angles. b, Model predictions, and the ex-situ 3D imaging results of the sample (cross-sectional view) when overlapping the laser spots in the configurations with the highest, lowest, and target central displacement.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary notes, figures, table, video legends and references.

Peer Review File

Supplementary Video 1

41586_2022_5061_MOESM4_ESM.mp4

Supplementary Video 2. The target shapes and slow-motion video in Supplementary Video 2 were reconstructed and reproduced with permission from supplementary video 1 (00:00:15–00:04:23, 0.6× playback) in ref. 42 (Elsevier).

Supplementary Video 3

Supplementary Video 4

Supplementary Video 5

Supplementary Video 6

Supplementary Video 7

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bai, Y., Wang, H., Xue, Y. et al. A dynamically reprogrammable surface with self-evolving shape morphing. Nature 609, 701–708 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05061-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05061-w

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing