Page 3 of 4

Re: Tendon-driven vs direct-actuated fingers - reliability in practice?

Posted: Sat Dec 14, 2024 6:57 pm
by park44
Worth being a little skeptical of the marketing angle here. 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. 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. This whole thread is a good reminder how young this field still is.

Re: Tendon-driven vs direct-actuated fingers - reliability in practice?

Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2024 5:24 am
by servoken70
I'd push back on this a bit. 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. 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. Makes me wonder how this looks in another five years.

Re: Tendon-driven vs direct-actuated fingers - reliability in practice?

Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2024 4:15 pm
by nicole57
I see it a little differently. 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: Tendon-driven vs direct-actuated fingers - reliability in practice?

Posted: Mon Jan 06, 2025 4:48 am
by scott21
@nicole57 I see it a little differently. 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: Tendon-driven vs direct-actuated fingers - reliability in practice?

Posted: Mon Jan 13, 2025 12:23 pm
by jhansen
Counterpoint: 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. 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: Tendon-driven vs direct-actuated fingers - reliability in practice?

Posted: Tue Jan 14, 2025 5:35 pm
by sharonschmidt
@jhansen Slightly off-topic, but related: 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. 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.

Re: Tendon-driven vs direct-actuated fingers - reliability in practice?

Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2025 5:30 pm
by dchen
@sharonschmidt That's the official framing, at least - reality tends to lag a bit. 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.

Re: Tendon-driven vs direct-actuated fingers - reliability in practice?

Posted: Tue Jan 28, 2025 4:49 pm
by matthew43
@dchen Just to be precise about one thing: 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. Totally unrelated but has anyone else noticed how fast component costs are dropping this year.

Re: Tendon-driven vs direct-actuated fingers - reliability in practice?

Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2025 10:59 am
by camila.jackson0
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: Tendon-driven vs direct-actuated fingers - reliability in practice?

Posted: Mon Feb 10, 2025 7:35 am
by ethan_fisc
@camila.jackson0 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.