Robotics Design and Development Services

The development lifecycle runs from a defined problem to a robotic system working on your floor. We start with requirements and the safety category, then move into mechanical and electronics design and build a prototype in our lab. Firmware and control software follow on that hardware, and integration testing happens against your real production environment.

The last stage is commissioning and the support model, which covers firmware releases and component obsolescence. Every stage ends with something you can watch run, so what you are approving is demonstrated behavior.

Four, and the hard part is getting them to agree. Mechanics sets the kinematics and the enclosure. Electronics turns that into boards and power stages. Firmware runs the real-time control systems on top of it. Control software handles motion planning and perception, and gives the operator something to work with.

Most delays happen at the seams. A clean mechanical concept can turn out to be unroutable on a four-layer board, or a control loop that behaved in simulation misses its deadline on a microcontroller already busy servicing encoder interrupts. When separate vendors own separate layers, the integration bill arrives at the end, which is why we keep all four in one team.

Design answers what the machine will be, and development builds it. Design covers kinematics, actuator selection, electronics architecture, and the safety concept, and it hands over drawings and schematics with a plan you can build against. Development is PCB layout, firmware, control software, and the test rigs that prove it works.

We do both, and that matters, because in robotics product development most of the expensive surprises come from a design decision nobody checked against implementation reality.

Yes, and hardware and software development sitting in one team is usually why people call us. A robotics development company that covers only one layer has to subcontract the rest, and that is where integration cost comes from. Here the same organization designs the electronics and writes the firmware, and the control software comes from the same group, so an interface change gets settled in a conversation instead of a change request.

You can also bring us in for one layer only. Plenty of teams start with firmware for a machine that already exists, or with a control software rebuild, then widen the scope once we have worked together.

Yes. If the mechanics are already settled, we can take just the embedded layer: real-time control on an RTOS or embedded Linux, plus the drivers and the boards underneath it. Teams usually arrive this way when a machine already exists and its firmware needs rebuilding rather than patching.

We start with the duty cycle and your risk assessment, because those two decide the safety category and most of the hardware. From there we design the drive chain and the controller, then build the motion software against the cycle times your line actually runs.

Fieldbus usually comes down to EtherCAT or CANopen, depending on what the plant already has. Security follows IEC 62443, and validation includes endurance runs plus EMC pre-compliance in our lab, so nothing surprising turns up once an external body gets involved.

A quality system, before it requires any code. We work under ISO 13485 and produce IEC 62304 documentation while the software is being written, with risk management to ISO 14971 and electrical safety to IEC 60601-1.

The part teams tend to underestimate is traceability from requirement to test. Building it as you go costs a fraction of reconstructing it for a 510(k) or an MDR submission, so we treat the design history file as a deliverable from day one.

Control code is Rust or C++, depending on how much safety weight it carries and what you already own, running on an RTOS such as Zephyr or FreeRTOS, or on embedded Linux built with Yocto. Higher up it is ROS 2, with micro-ROS on the microcontroller side and Nav2 or MoveIt 2 where they fit the job.

Perception work uses OpenCV and PyTorch, deployed through TensorRT or ONNX Runtime on Jetson or a comparable module. On the hardware side we design in Altium Designer around STM32, NXP i.MX, or whichever compute module you have already standardized on.

Safety is an architecture decision, so we take it first. We derive the required performance level from your risk assessment, then put the safety chain in hardware wherever a software fault must never be the only thing standing between a person and a moving axis.

For updates, every release ships as a signed image to A/B partitions, and a watchdog reverts any unit that fails its health check after the switch. Rollouts go by cohort so a bad release stops at the first group. Keys sit in a hardware root of trust, and we test the update path on production hardware during validation, because a rollback that has never run is a rollback you do not have.