Anyone quantified how grasp success rate changes with lighting conditions?
-
jonathan.rao1
- Posts: 156
- Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2024 7:58 pm
Re: Anyone quantified how grasp success rate changes with lighting conditions?
@jwang Respectfully, I think this undersells it a bit.
Wet, oily, or otherwise low-friction objects are still a genuine edge case for most current hands, since tactile sensing and grasp-force controllers are typically tuned and validated on dry, higher-friction test objects. In-hand reorientation (repositioning a grasped object without setting it down) is one of the more advanced manipulation skills, requiring either a highly dexterous hand with enough DoF or clever use of gravity and controlled slipping - it's an active research area rather than a solved problem.
Currently: 3D printing my way to bankruptcy.
-
ethan_fisc
- Posts: 198
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2024 1:36 am
Re: Anyone quantified how grasp success rate changes with lighting conditions?
This matches what I've seen too.
Compliant wrists that absorb impact during a bad approach or misjudged contact reduce mechanical stress on the whole arm, which matters a lot for long-term reliability even though it's a less visible feature than the hand itself.
Re: Anyone quantified how grasp success rate changes with lighting conditions?
@ethan_fisc Tangent, but worth mentioning:
A lot of the manipulation shown in production demos still leans heavily on teleoperation, particularly for anything involving fine force control or novel objects - autonomous grasp success rates on genuinely unstructured, previously-unseen clutter are still well below what teleoperation can achieve. Bimanual manipulation - two arms coordinating on one task - is harder than it looks mostly because of the added degrees of freedom and the timing/force coordination required; a lot of 'two-handed' demos are actually closer to two independent single-hand tasks done in sequence.
she/her | grad student, biped locomotion
Re: Anyone quantified how grasp success rate changes with lighting conditions?
@nicole57 This is a great summary, thanks.
Wet, oily, or otherwise low-friction objects are still a genuine edge case for most current hands, since tactile sensing and grasp-force controllers are typically tuned and validated on dry, higher-friction test objects. Tendon-driven fingers let you move the heavier actuators back into the palm or forearm, keeping the fingers themselves light and fast, but they introduce cable routing, tensioning, and long-term wear problems that direct-actuated fingers don't have.
-
ethan_fisc
- Posts: 198
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2024 1:36 am
Re: Anyone quantified how grasp success rate changes with lighting conditions?
I dealt with almost this exact situation.
Vision-based grasp confidence estimation (predicting success before attempting a grasp) and tactile-based confirmation (confirming after contact) are complementary rather than competing - vision helps you choose a grasp, tactile tells you if it actually worked.
Re: Anyone quantified how grasp success rate changes with lighting conditions?
Minor factual note:
Compliant wrists that absorb impact during a bad approach or misjudged contact reduce mechanical stress on the whole arm, which matters a lot for long-term reliability even though it's a less visible feature than the hand itself.
Re: Anyone quantified how grasp success rate changes with lighting conditions?
@jwang Short answer:
Figure's fourth-generation Dexterous Hand (on Figure 02/03) reportedly offers 16 degrees of freedom per hand with sensors integrated into each finger, aimed at fine force control tasks like handling small electronic components without crushing them.
she/her | grad student, biped locomotion
-
pierregreen
- Posts: 205
- Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2024 11:01 am
Re: Anyone quantified how grasp success rate changes with lighting conditions?
Agreed, and I'd add:
Underactuated hands (fewer actuators than joints, using mechanical coupling to shape the grasp) are a reasonable engineering compromise for robust power grasps on a budget, but they generally can't do fine in-hand manipulation the way a fully actuated hand can. Bimanual manipulation - two arms coordinating on one task - is harder than it looks mostly because of the added degrees of freedom and the timing/force coordination required; a lot of 'two-handed' demos are actually closer to two independent single-hand tasks done in sequence.
she/her
Re: Anyone quantified how grasp success rate changes with lighting conditions?
Short answer:
Bimanual manipulation - two arms coordinating on one task - is harder than it looks mostly because of the added degrees of freedom and the timing/force coordination required; a lot of 'two-handed' demos are actually closer to two independent single-hand tasks done in sequence.
she/her
Re: Anyone quantified how grasp success rate changes with lighting conditions?
Just to be precise about one thing:
A lot of the manipulation shown in production demos still leans heavily on teleoperation, particularly for anything involving fine force control or novel objects - autonomous grasp success rates on genuinely unstructured, previously-unseen clutter are still well below what teleoperation can achieve. Vision-based grasp confidence estimation (predicting success before attempting a grasp) and tactile-based confirmation (confirming after contact) are complementary rather than competing - vision helps you choose a grasp, tactile tells you if it actually worked.