Page 2 of 2

Re: Anthropomorphic hands vs task-optimized end effectors - which wins for warehouses?

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2026 4:32 pm
by scott21
@ananya.novak Small correction on one detail: 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. 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: Anthropomorphic hands vs task-optimized end effectors - which wins for warehouses?

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2026 10:42 pm
by benjaminsanchez
This matches what I've seen too. 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. 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: Anthropomorphic hands vs task-optimized end effectors - which wins for warehouses?

Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2026 8:05 am
by sharonschmidt
@benjaminsanchez From what I've seen: Imitation learning from human demonstration video (without robot teleoperation data) is an appealing way to scale up training data cheaply, but it runs into the embodiment gap - human hand kinematics and force profiles don't map directly onto a robot hand's very different mechanism. 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: Anthropomorphic hands vs task-optimized end effectors - which wins for warehouses?

Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2026 6:07 am
by barbara50
@sharonschmidt This is a great summary, thanks. Imitation learning from human demonstration video (without robot teleoperation data) is an appealing way to scale up training data cheaply, but it runs into the embodiment gap - human hand kinematics and force profiles don't map directly onto a robot hand's very different mechanism. This whole thread is a good reminder how young this field still is.

Re: Anthropomorphic hands vs task-optimized end effectors - which wins for warehouses?

Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2026 2:48 pm
by amandawhite
@barbara50 Appreciate the detailed answer. 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. 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: Anthropomorphic hands vs task-optimized end effectors - which wins for warehouses?

Posted: Mon Jul 20, 2026 2:47 pm
by ssantos
@amandawhite This lines up with my experience. Grasp planning for deformable or non-rigid objects (bags, cables, cloth) remains one of the genuinely unsolved problems in manipulation - rigid-body grasp models simply don't capture how the object will behave once contact starts. 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: Anthropomorphic hands vs task-optimized end effectors - which wins for warehouses?

Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2026 9:28 pm
by lbianchi
@ssantos That's the official framing, at least - reality tends to lag a bit. 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.

Re: Anthropomorphic hands vs task-optimized end effectors - which wins for warehouses?

Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2026 5:09 pm
by amandawhite
Just to be precise about one thing: 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. 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: Anthropomorphic hands vs task-optimized end effectors - which wins for warehouses?

Posted: Thu Jul 30, 2026 12:39 am
by donna_wata
@amandawhite Not sure I fully agree here. 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. Anyway, good thread - following for more.