Page 2 of 3

Re: How fine does force control need to be for handling eggs vs boxes in the same shift?

Posted: Thu Jan 30, 2025 4:34 am
by jhansen
New to this, so forgive me if this is obvious - Cable routing through a wrist joint with multiple degrees of freedom is a genuinely tricky mechanical design problem - tendons and wiring both need enough slack to avoid binding through the full range of motion without tangling or fraying over thousands of cycles.

Re: How fine does force control need to be for handling eggs vs boxes in the same shift?

Posted: Sun Feb 02, 2025 1:11 am
by noah_pate
@jhansen Thanks for laying this out, genuinely useful. Object occlusion by the robot's own hand during the final approach to a grasp is a common and annoying perception problem - the closer the hand gets to a good grasp position, the more it blocks the camera's view of exactly what it's about to grab. 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.

Re: How fine does force control need to be for handling eggs vs boxes in the same shift?

Posted: Mon Feb 03, 2025 3:19 pm
by chloe_jack
@noah_pate Thanks for laying this out, genuinely useful. 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.

Re: How fine does force control need to be for handling eggs vs boxes in the same shift?

Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 3:17 pm
by deborah59
@chloe_jack Small correction on one detail: 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. Palm sensing gets less attention than fingertip sensing, but a lot of power grasps (holding a box, a tool handle) rely more on palm and lateral finger contact than fingertip contact, so under-sensing the palm can leave a real blind spot in grasp confidence.

Re: How fine does force control need to be for handling eggs vs boxes in the same shift?

Posted: Tue Feb 25, 2025 10:09 am
by mia.weber
Pretty much this. One thing to add: 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. Payload-to-hand-weight ratio varies a lot across current dexterous hands, and it's a meaningful tradeoff - more DoF and finer sensing generally means more actuators and mass in the hand itself, which eats into the arm's usable payload budget.

Re: How fine does force control need to be for handling eggs vs boxes in the same shift?

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2025 9:53 pm
by mia_lars
@mia.weber I don't think that's quite right, for what it's worth. 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.

Re: How fine does force control need to be for handling eggs vs boxes in the same shift?

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2025 7:01 pm
by scott.andersson5
@mia_lars Side note that might be relevant: Object occlusion by the robot's own hand during the final approach to a grasp is a common and annoying perception problem - the closer the hand gets to a good grasp position, the more it blocks the camera's view of exactly what it's about to grab. 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.

Re: How fine does force control need to be for handling eggs vs boxes in the same shift?

Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2025 1:49 am
by yuki71
New to this, so forgive me if this is obvious - 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.

Re: How fine does force control need to be for handling eggs vs boxes in the same shift?

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2025 9:10 am
by carlossanchez
@yuki71 This lines up with my experience. Cable routing through a wrist joint with multiple degrees of freedom is a genuinely tricky mechanical design problem - tendons and wiring both need enough slack to avoid binding through the full range of motion without tangling or fraying over thousands of cycles. 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. Reminds me a bit of the early drone hobbyist scene, honestly.

Re: How fine does force control need to be for handling eggs vs boxes in the same shift?

Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2025 8:30 pm
by carol.robinson
This is exactly the kind of context I was looking for. 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. Object occlusion by the robot's own hand during the final approach to a grasp is a common and annoying perception problem - the closer the hand gets to a good grasp position, the more it blocks the camera's view of exactly what it's about to grab.