Page 3 of 4
Re: How much does wrist compliance reduce damage from failed grasp attempts?
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2026 2:35 am
by karen_kim
@lbianchi This lines up with my experience.
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. 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: How much does wrist compliance reduce damage from failed grasp attempts?
Posted: Thu Jan 29, 2026 9:11 pm
by barbara.jones
@karen_kim One nitpick -
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.
Reminds me a bit of the early drone hobbyist scene, honestly.
Re: How much does wrist compliance reduce damage from failed grasp attempts?
Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2026 11:36 am
by matthew.yamamoto0
I'd push back on this a bit.
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. 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.
Re: How much does wrist compliance reduce damage from failed grasp attempts?
Posted: Sat Feb 07, 2026 1:05 am
by williams84
I'd take that specific number with a grain of salt, honestly.
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. 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 much does wrist compliance reduce damage from failed grasp attempts?
Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2026 5:41 am
by camila.jackson0
Counterpoint:
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: How much does wrist compliance reduce damage from failed grasp attempts?
Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2026 2:03 pm
by kwilliams
@camila.jackson0 Slight correction, though the overall point stands:
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. 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.
Reminds me a bit of the early drone hobbyist scene, honestly.
Re: How much does wrist compliance reduce damage from failed grasp attempts?
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2026 4:08 am
by rossi30
One nitpick -
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 much does wrist compliance reduce damage from failed grasp attempts?
Posted: Sat Mar 14, 2026 6:45 am
by ivan22
Yeah, this tracks with what I've read as well.
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.
Re: How much does wrist compliance reduce damage from failed grasp attempts?
Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2026 5:07 am
by robertmiller
@ivan22 Ran into exactly this myself.
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. 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: How much does wrist compliance reduce damage from failed grasp attempts?
Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2026 7:49 pm
by yuki71
I can speak to this a bit.
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.