Three shapes, three different answers to the same question. Each can do something the others cannot, and each has something that rules it out of some operations.
A torso, two arms, walking. A shape that moves along the same route as a person.
The same torso with arms, but instead of legs a telescopic column on a chassis. Our default choice. We explain why further down the page.
It is not a humanoid; it is on the list because in some tasks the shape matters, not the hands.
Our default choice is a humanoid torso on a mobile base. It removes the risk of falling, which is the main obstacle to safety certification for two-legged platforms, reliability goes up and energy consumption goes down.
It has a specific cost and we do not hide it: the robot needs a step-free route.
It cannot climb stairs and it cannot get across uneven terrain.
But it is a default choice, not a dogma. When the task requires legs, we will discuss a two-legged platform, including what that does to the certification of the station. That decision belongs to the task, not to company philosophy.
We are an integrator, not a robot manufacturer. The brand of the machine does not matter to us; we choose it by the task. Our work is everything that turns it into a filled position.
The layers that decide whether the robot really does the job. They are the same whoever made the machine.
The machine, from the manufacturer that suits the task best. Today most often from China, where the vast majority of platforms are made.
That question can be answered in one site visit. The platform is only half of the answer, though; the other half is what the robot has at the end of its arm.