Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Vibration-based Full State In-Hand Manipulation of Thin Objects

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read By driving a grasped object's center of mass around a small circle while vibrating it, a simple two-finger gripper can rotate thin objects to any desired orientation and then slide them to any position.

desk verdict The experimental full-state control works, but the cyclic-motion 'analysis' confuses the object's rotation rate with the COM's angular rate, so the theory overclaims. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.14899 v1 pith:EISL45DN submitted 2024-12-19 cs.RO

Oron Binyamin , Guy Shapira , Noam Nahum , Avishai Sintov This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.RO
keywords vibration-basedmanipulationin-handparallelgripperstick-slipcyclicmotiondutycyclemodulationfullstatecontrolthinobjects
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that a parallel-jaw gripper equipped with a single vibrating finger can manipulate a thin grasped object to any desired position and orientation, not just pick-and-place. The key idea is to excite a cyclic motion in which the object's center of mass travels on a constant-radius circle about the gripper's center, and this circulation continuously changes the object's orientation angle. Once the orientation is reached, the object is returned to the center and translated outward along a line through the center, so position changes without disturbing the angle. The paper also shows that duty-cycle-modulated vibration holds the orientation during translation far better than continuous vibration, with reported position errors near two millimeters and orientation errors near one to three degrees. If correct, this gives affordable industrial grippers a dexterity they currently lack, for tasks such as inserting cards or orienting tools.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the cyclic-motion mode derived from the rigid-body dynamics: when the object is held at radius rc and driven with steering angle θ = ±π, the radial and tangential force balance (14)-(15) yields constant angular speed ϕ̇² = (fv − fk)/(M rc) and zero orientation acceleration ψ̈ = 0; if the object was already rotating, its orientation angle ψ keeps changing at a constant rate while the center of mass traces a circle. The same analysis shows rc must be nonzero, so rotation is impossible when the object's center of mass sits exactly at the gripper center. Duty cycle modulation, a second piece of machinery, periodically pauses vibration so that static friction can re-stabilize the object, which the paper argues is why orientation is maintained during translation.

What would settle it

Measure r(t) and ψ̇(t) over many cycles during the constant-radius rotation phase with no feedback correction: if the orbit radius drifts appreciably or ψ̇ decays while the vibration keeps running, the constant-net-force model of equations (14)-(18) is contradicted. A second check is that with r(t) = 0 the algorithm must fail to rotate, exactly as equation (18) predicts.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that orientation control, previously impossible with the underactuated vibration finger, can be achieved by deliberately making the object's center of mass orbit the grasp point. In the dynamic model, setting the vibration force at steering angle θ = ±π while the object already has nonzero rotational velocity ψ̇ and sits at radius rc > 0 keeps ψ̇ constant, and equations (14)-(18) describe uniform circular motion of the center of mass at radius rc. The paper assembles this cyclic motion into a manipulation algorithm: rotate first, return to the center, then translate to the goal along the radial direction, using duty cycle modulation of the motor during translation to preserve the achieved orientation. Finite element simulation and experiments on a disk, a rectangular plate, a credit card, a ruler, and a cellphone support the claim, with task success rates of 100%, 70%, and 90% for the card, ruler, and cellphone respectively.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation assumes the net driving force fv minus the kinetic friction force fk stays constant during motion, even though stick-slip friction is inherently impulsive and time-varying; if that steadiness fails, the predicted constant-radius circular orbit and stable orientation maintenance are not guaranteed by the analysis.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A standard parallel gripper plus one vibrating finger can deliver full planar state control of thin objects: desired orientation first, then desired position.
  • Duty cycle modulation should be used for translational phases and continuous vibration for rotational phases, since that combination produced orientation errors of roughly 1 to 3 degrees and position errors under 2 millimeters.
  • The cyclic-motion condition requires a nonzero radius rc, so rotation happens by orbiting the center of mass around the grasp point rather than spinning in place.
  • Thin, narrow objects can still be rotated, but their limited maximum rc makes dropping more likely; task success for the ruler was 70% versus 90-100% for wider objects.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because rotation and translation are executed sequentially, the approach likely cannot track arbitrary paths that require simultaneous position and orientation change; a two-vibrating-finger design would be the natural extension.
  • The constant-radius circular model treats the net drive force as steady, while the physics is impulsive stick-slip; the measured periodic ripples in r and ψ suggest the control tolerates model error rather than following it, so quantifying robustness bounds on rc and ψ̇ would be a testable next step.
  • Objects with asymmetric mass distributions could stress the tilt-balance force fd(r), which enters the slip condition and may limit the achievable rc for off-center center-of-mass objects.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a vibration-based mechanism, the Vibration Finger Manipulator (VFM), to control the full planar state (position and orientation) of a thin object grasped by a parallel gripper. The authors extend prior position-only control by adding a cyclic-motion primitive: the object's center of mass is driven in a small circle about the gripping point, which changes the orientation angle ψ while keeping the grip. The proposed Algorithm 1 first translates the object to the origin, rotates it to the desired orientation via the cyclic motion, then translates it along the radial direction to the target position, with duty-cycle modulation used during translation to preserve orientation. The paper provides a dynamic model, a finite element analysis, experiments on a disk and a rectangular plate, and task demonstrations (credit card insertion, ruler alignment, cellphone hand-over). The main claim is that this low-cost augmentation enables full-state in-hand manipulation with demonstrated accuracy.

Significance. If the results hold, the work offers an inexpensive way to add orientation control to simple parallel grippers, which are normally limited to pick-and-place. The experimental validation is a genuine strength: the system is tested on multiple objects of different thickness, weight, and texture, with reported position errors of about 1–2 mm and orientation errors of about 1–3° when using the duty-cycle scheme. The task demonstrations, including the cellphone hand-over, give practical credibility. The paper also includes an FEM study and a comparison between constant-frequency and duty-cycle excitation, although these are qualitative. However, the analytical development is substantially weaker than the paper claims: the key cyclic-motion derivation is internally inconsistent, and the 'full analytical analysis' promised in the abstract does not match the equations presented. The empirical evidence is suggestive but not a substitute for a correct derivation of the rotation primitive, since Algorithm 1 relies on that primitive for its orientation control.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section II-B.4, Eqs. (14)–(18)] The claim that applying θ = ±π with |ψ̇(tπ)| > 0 and r(tπ) = rc > 0 produces circular COM motion is not supported by the equations. Circular motion requires a non-zero COM angular rate φ̇, but from rest (φ̇ = ψ̇ = 0), Eqs. (14)–(16) with θ = π give r¨ = −(fv−fk)/M and φ¨ = ψ¨ = 0, which describes inward radial motion, not a circular orbit. The stated condition |ψ̇(tπ)| > 0 concerns the object's orientation rate, which is unrelated to φ̇; Eq. (18) requires φ̇² = (fv−fk)/(M rc), a condition that the proof never establishes. The derivation therefore does not prove the cyclic-motion theorem it states.
  2. [Algorithm 1, Line 7; Section II-C.4] The kick step that is supposed to initiate the rotation is not modeled. The text says a short application of θΔt creates the needed angular velocity, but the analysis never shows that this kick produces the φ̇ required by Eq. (18), nor how the chosen radius rc is matched. The parameters θΔt and Δt are explicitly said to be 'calibrated manually based on trial and error' in Section III.B. Hence the rotational primitive is an empirically tuned heuristic, not a prediction of the analytical model, contradicting the abstract's claim of a 'full analytical analysis of the cyclic phenomenon.'
  3. [Section II-B.3, before Eq. (10)] The assumption that the net force fv − fk is constant is not derived from the stick-slip mechanics. According to Eqs. (7)–(9), the stick-slip process involves time-varying fN and fk over each vibration cycle, yet Eqs. (10)–(12) treat (fv−fk) as a steady value depending only on ω. No averaging, time-scale separation, or other justification is given. This assumption is load-bearing because Eq. (18) and the entire constant-radius circular-motion prediction follow from it. The experimental data in Fig. 7 show periodic variations in r and ψ, which is consistent with the model being only approximate. The paper should either provide a rigorous derivation of the constant-force approximation or explicitly label the analysis as heuristic.
  4. [Section II-C and Algorithm 1] No convergence or stability analysis is provided for the overall Algorithm 1. The partial-stability result cited from [33] applies to the position controller (19) alone, and the paper does not prove that the sequential 'move to origin, rotate, return to origin, translate to goal' procedure reaches the desired state or that the orientation error stays bounded during the final translation. The paper's analytical claims should be limited to what the equations actually establish, with the experimental results serving as the primary evidence for the full-state control loop.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table I] The orientation error for the disk with constant frequency ωo is not reported, which makes the advantage of duty-cycle control less transparent; please provide the missing entry or explain its absence.
  2. [Table I] The abbreviation 'Rec.' should be spelled out as 'Rectangle', and the entry '2.7 +- 1.3' should use the standard '±' symbol for consistency.
  3. [Section II-C.2] The statement that 'moving through the COM maintains a constant angle ψ(t) = 0' is imprecise: Eq. (13) only guarantees ψ¨ = 0 when θ = ±π exactly. A brief justification of why the feedback controller (19) keeps θ close to ±π during translation would clarify the argument.
  4. [Section III.A] The FEM is explicitly qualitative, but the paper should also state that it does not validate the specific constant-radius prediction of Eq. (18); the simulation only shows cyclic behavior consistent with the primitive, not a quantitative match.
  5. [Eq. (17)] The division by Eq. (14) used to derive Eq. (17) is not valid when cosθ = 0; the singular case θ = ±π/2 is not discussed, even though it could occur during the kick phase.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The cyclic-motion theorem in §II-B.4 assumes the constant-radius COM orbit it then 'predicts': the stated trigger |ψ̇|>0 is the object-spin rate, not the COM orbital rate φ̇ required by Eqs. (14)-(18), and the kick that supplies the missing initial condition is manually tuned rather than derived.

  1. self definitional [Section II-B.4, Eqs. (14)-(18) and the theorem paragraph after Eq. (18)]
    "we propose to exert cyclic motion on the object to generate rotation. That is, we enforce motion of the object's COM in a constant radius r(t) = rc such that ˙r(t) = ¨r(t) = 0. In such a case, Equations (10)-(12) will be updated to ... Hence, by applying the vibration force fv with angle θ = ±π at time tπ while |ψ̇(tπ)| > 0 and r(tπ) = rc > 0, the COM will move on a circular path centered at O with radius rc while |ψ̇(t)| > 0."

    Equations (14)-(16) are obtained by imposing the constant-radius circular-motion constraint, so the circular path is an input, not a derived output. For θ=±π, Eqs. (15) and (14) give φ¨=0 and φ̇²=(fv-fk)/(M rc); this condition involves the COM angular rate φ̇, which appears nowhere in the theorem's premise |ψ̇(tπ)|>0. The proof therefore swaps the object's spin rate ψ̇ for the COM orbital rate φ̇. Without φ̇ satisfying Eq. (18), θ=±π produces radial acceleration according to Eq. (10), not a circular orbit. The claimed cyclic-motion prediction is exactly the assumption made at the start of the derivation, restated with a different variable.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section III-B, Algorithm evaluation]
    "to initiate the cyclic motion, vibration with an excitation angle in the range θΔt ∈ [ π/6, π/4] was applied for Δt = 0.1sec before setting θ = π as presented in the algorithm. These values were calibrated manually based on trial and error... The cyclic motion was achieved 100% of the 10 trials tested in this experiment."

    The kick parameters θΔ and Δt are not derived from the model; the paper states they are calibrated manually based on trial and error. The analytical derivation only describes what must hold if a constant-radius orbit already exists, namely φ̇²=(fv-fk)/(M rc). It does not determine what kick creates that orbit, nor does it connect the generated spin rate ψ̇ to the required COM angular rate φ̇. The subsequent 100% cyclic-motion success therefore validates the tuned launch, not a model prediction. The observed cyclic motion is an input produced by fitted parameters, not an independent confirmation of the analytical analysis.

full rationale

The full-state manipulation algorithm is externally validated in this paper by FEM, controlled experiments, and task demonstrations on real objects, so the overall system is not merely a self-consistent theoretical construct. No load-bearing self-citation chain was found: the references to prior work [32] and to the external partial-stability theorem [33] are used for the position controller, which is also independently exercised in the present experiments. However, the paper's central analytical contribution—the cyclic-motion theorem in Section II-B.4—does reduce by construction. The constant-radius orbit is imposed as the starting constraint, the derived consistency condition involves φ̇ while the stated trigger is ψ̇, and the experimental kick that supplies the missing initial condition is manually tuned rather than predicted. Thus the analytical derivation does not independently predict the cyclic phenomenon; it describes an assumed motion and is completed by trial-and-error fitted parameters. This is partial circularity: one advertised prediction reduces to its own input, while the rest of the manipulation system retains independent experimental support.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a mix of standard rigid-body mechanics and several domain-specific simplifications. The most fragile is the constancy of the net driving force, which is not derived from the stick-slip inequalities (Eqs. (7)-(9)). The rotation is initiated by a manually tuned kick (θ_Δt, Δt), outside the model. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • θ_Δt = π/6 to π/4
    Angle of the vibration force applied for Δt to initiate object rotation. Manually calibrated based on trial and error (Section III-B).
  • Δt = 0.1 s
    Duration of the initial rotation kick. Set manually and used for all experiments.
  • Duty cycle = 50%
    Duty cycle of the vibration motor during translational moves; chosen without reported optimization.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The net force fv − fk exerted on the object is constant and defined by the frequency ω.
    Invoked in Section II-B.3 to reduce Eqs. (10)-(12) to a constant-force system; the stick-slip dynamics that would determine this average force are not derived.
  • domain assumption The gripper axis is vertical and the object is nearly horizontal.
    Stated in Section II-B.2; simplifies the normal-force expression and ignores out-of-plane dynamics; prior work showed operation while inclined.
  • domain assumption Torsional friction at the contact point is negligible.
    Assumed in Section II-B.3 to let Eq. (12) hold without a friction torque term; the authors say they validate this later in experiments.
  • ad hoc to paper The initial angular velocity |ψ̇(tπ)| > 0 can be imparted by a short unmodeled kick at angle θ_Δt.
    Algorithm 1 Line 7 uses an empirically tuned kick to start the rotation; its magnitude is not predicted by the analytical model.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Vibration-based Full State In-Hand Manipulation of Thin Objects." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EISL45DN

@misc{pith2026241214899,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Vibration-based Full State In-Hand Manipulation of Thin Objects},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EISL45DN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.14899}
}
read the original abstract

Robotic hands offer advanced manipulation capabilities, while their complexity and cost often limit their real-world applications. In contrast, simple parallel grippers, though affordable, are restricted to basic tasks like pick-and-place. Recently, a vibration-based mechanism was proposed to augment parallel grippers and enable in-hand manipulation capabilities for thin objects. By utilizing the stick-slip phenomenon, a simple controller was able to drive a grasped object to a desired position. However, due to the underactuated nature of the mechanism, direct control of the object's orientation was not possible. In this letter, we address the challenge of manipulating the entire state of the object. Hence, we present the excitation of a cyclic phenomenon where the object's center-of-mass rotates in a constant radius about the grasping point. With this cyclic motion, we propose an algorithm for manipulating the object to desired states. In addition to a full analytical analysis of the cyclic phenomenon, we propose the use of duty cycle modulation in operating the vibration actuator to provide more accurate manipulation. Finite element analysis, experiments and task demonstrations validate the proposed algorithm.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.14899 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A parallel gripper equipped with the Vibration Finger Manipulator [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Design of the Vibratory Finger Manipulator (VFM) and its mount on a parallel jaw gripper. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Illustration of (a) a bottom-view where vibration force [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The simulated FEM in Abaqus CAE-Explicit. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FEM simulation with object displacement over 1.5 seconds of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Object rotation velocity ψ˙ with respect to vibration frequency, acquired with an FEM model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Demonstration of an initiated cyclic motion (left) with a disc, where the curve is the path of its COM. Measured (middle) orientation angle and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Manipulation example for moving the object to a desired state. First, the object is rotated from its current orientation angle (cyan arrow) to a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: a manipulated object, a VFM and a top passive [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: State trajectory of the manipulation example seen in Figure 8, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Example trial of manipulating a steel ruler to touch a red circle. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Example trial of handing over a cellphone to a user. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Vib2Move: In-Hand Object Reconfiguration via Fingertip Micro-Vibrations

    cs.RO 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Vib2Move controls fingertip vibrations to modulate friction, letting a parallel gripper slide and rotate planar objects in hand under gravity with about 6 mm final position error.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [33]

    On the theory of partial stability,

    V . V orotnikov, “On the theory of partial stability,” Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics , vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 525–531, 1995

    work page 1995

  2. [1]

    Survey of learning-based approaches for robotic in-hand manipulation,

    A. I. Weinberg, O. Azulay, A. Shirizly, and A. Sintov, “Survey of learning-based approaches for robotic in-hand manipulation,”Frontiers in Robotics and AI , vol. 11, 2024

    2024

  3. [2]

    Robotic swing-up regrasping ma- nipulation based on impulse-momentum approach and cLQR control,

    A. Sintov, O. Tslil, and A. Shapiro, “Robotic swing-up regrasping ma- nipulation based on impulse-momentum approach and cLQR control,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics , vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 1079–1090, 2016

    work page 2016

  4. [3]

    Integrating path planning and pivoting,

    S. Cruciani and C. Smith, “Integrating path planning and pivoting,” in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2018, pp. 6601–6608

    work page 2018

  5. [4]

    Extrinsic dexterity: In-hand manipulation with external forces,

    N. C. Dafle, A. Rodriguez, R. Paolini, B. Tang, S. S. Srinivasa, M. Erdmann, M. T. Mason, I. Lundberg, H. Staab, and T. Fuhlbrigge, “Extrinsic dexterity: In-hand manipulation with external forces,” in 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2014, pp. 1578–1585

    work page 2014

  6. [5]

    Planar in-hand manipulation via motion cones,

    N. Chavan-Dafle, R. Holladay, and A. Rodriguez, “Planar in-hand manipulation via motion cones,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 39, no. 2-3, pp. 163–182, 2020

    work page 2020

  7. [6]

    Planning in-hand object manipulation with multifingered hands considering task constraints,

    K. Hertkorn, M. A. Roa, and C. Borst, “Planning in-hand object manipulation with multifingered hands considering task constraints,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation , 2013, pp. 617–624

    work page 2013

  8. [7]

    Design of parallel-jaw gripper tip surfaces for robust grasping,

    M. Guo, D. V . Gealy, J. Liang, J. Mahler, A. Goncalves, S. McKinley, J. A. Ojea, and K. Goldberg, “Design of parallel-jaw gripper tip surfaces for robust grasping,” in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , 2017, pp. 2831–2838

    work page 2017

Show all 34 references
  1. [8]

    Robotic pick-and-place of novel objects in clutter with multi-affordance grasping and cross-domain image matching,

    A. Zeng, S. Song, K.-T. Yu, E. Donlon, F. R. Hogan, M. Bauza, D. Ma, O. Taylor, M. Liu, E. Romo, N. Fazeli, F. Alet, N. C. Dafle, R. Holladay, I. Morena, P. Qu Nair, D. Green, I. Taylor, W. Liu, T. Funkhouser, and A. Rodriguez, “Robotic pick-and-place of novel objects in clutt...

    2018

  2. [9]

    In-Hand Manipulation Primitives for a Minimal, Underactuated Gripper With Active Surfaces,

    R. R. Ma and A. M. Dollar, “In-Hand Manipulation Primitives for a Minimal, Underactuated Gripper With Active Surfaces,” ser. Inter. Design Eng. Tech. Conf. and Computers and Information in Eng. Conference, vol. Mechanisms and Robotics Conference, 08 2016

    2016

  3. [10]

    Pnugrip: An active two-phase gripper for dexterous manipulation,

    I. H. Taylor, N. Chavan-Dafle, G. Li, N. Doshi, and A. Rodriguez, “Pnugrip: An active two-phase gripper for dexterous manipulation,” in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2020, pp. 9144–9150

    2020

  4. [11]

    Motion planning of intelligent ma- nipulation by a parallel two-fingered gripper equipped with a simple rotating mechanism,

    H. Terasaki and T. Hasegawa, “Motion planning of intelligent ma- nipulation by a parallel two-fingered gripper equipped with a simple rotating mechanism,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 207–219, 1998

    1998

  5. [12]

    Design, modeling, and manipulability evaluation of a novel four-dof parallel gripper for dexterous in-hand manipulation,

    S. Zuo, J. Li, and M. Dong, “Design, modeling, and manipulability evaluation of a novel four-dof parallel gripper for dexterous in-hand manipulation,” J. of Mech. Sci. & Tech. , vol. 35, pp. 1–16, 06 2021

    2021

  6. [13]

    A locally-adaptive, parallel-jaw gripper with clamping and rolling capable, soft fingertips for fine manipulation of flexible flat cables,

    J. Chapman, G. Gorjup, A. Dwivedi, S. Matsunaga, T. Mariyama, B. MacDonald, and M. Liarokapis, “A locally-adaptive, parallel-jaw gripper with clamping and rolling capable, soft fingertips for fine manipulation of flexible flat cables,” in IEEE International Conference on Robot...

    2021

  7. [14]

    Chladni, Entdeckungen ¨uber die Theorie des Klanges

    E. Chladni, Entdeckungen ¨uber die Theorie des Klanges . Bey Weidmanns erben und Reich, 1787, no. 1

  8. [15]

    Analysing the vibrating conveyor,

    G. Winkler, “Analysing the vibrating conveyor,” International Journal of Mechanical Sciences , vol. 20, no. 9, pp. 561–570, 1978

    1978

  9. [16]

    Controlling the motion of multiple objects on a chladni plate,

    Q. Zhou, V . Sariola, K. Latifi, and V . Liimatainen, “Controlling the motion of multiple objects on a chladni plate,” Nature Communication, vol. 7, no. 12764, 2016

    2016

  10. [17]

    Multi-particle acoustic manipula- tion on a chladni plate,

    K. Latifi, H. Wijaya, and Q. Zhou, “Multi-particle acoustic manipula- tion on a chladni plate,” in International Conference on Manipulation, Automation and Robotics at Small Scales (MARSS) , 2017, pp. 1–7

    2017

  11. [18]

    Sensorless manipulation us- ing transverse vibrations of a plate,

    K. B ¨ohringer, V . Bhatt, and K. Goldberg, “Sensorless manipulation us- ing transverse vibrations of a plate,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation , vol. 2, 1995, pp. 1989 – 1996

    1995

  12. [19]

    A flat rigid plate is a universal planar manipulator,

    D. Reznik and J. Canny, “A flat rigid plate is a universal planar manipulator,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, vol. 2, 1998, pp. 1471–1477 vol.2

    1998

  13. [20]

    Stick and slip actuators: design, control, performances and applications,

    J. Breguet and R. Clavel, “Stick and slip actuators: design, control, performances and applications,” in International Symposium on Mi- cromechatronics and Human Science , 1998, pp. 89–95

    1998

  14. [21]

    Modelling and control of a novel vi- bratory feeder,

    W. Y . Du and S. L. Dickerson, “Modelling and control of a novel vi- bratory feeder,” in IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, 1999, pp. 496–501

    1999

  15. [22]

    Parallel manipulation based on stick-slip motion of vibrating platform,

    M. Mayyas, “Parallel manipulation based on stick-slip motion of vibrating platform,” Robotics, vol. 9, no. 4, 2020

    2020

  16. [23]

    Programmable assembly of particles on a chladni plate,

    A. Kopitca, K. Latifi, and Q. Zhou, “Programmable assembly of particles on a chladni plate,” Science Advances , vol. 7, no. 39, p. eabi7716, 2021

    2021

  17. [24]

    The dynamic analysis of stick-slip motion,

    C. Gao, D. Kuhlmann-Wilsdorf, and D. D. Makel, “The dynamic analysis of stick-slip motion,” Wear, vol. 173, no. 1, pp. 1–12, 1994

    1994

  18. [25]

    Analysis, design and control of a planar micro-robot driven by two centripetal-force actuators,

    P. Vartholomeos and E. Papadopoulos, “Analysis, design and control of a planar micro-robot driven by two centripetal-force actuators,” in IEEE Inter. Conf. on Robotics and Automation , 2006, pp. 649–654

    2006

  19. [26]

    Kilobot: A low cost robot with scalable operations designed for collective behaviors,

    M. Rubenstein, C. Ahler, N. Hoff, A. Cabrera, and R. Nagpal, “Kilobot: A low cost robot with scalable operations designed for collective behaviors,” Robotics and Autonomous Systems , vol. 62, no. 7, pp. 966 – 975, 2014

    2014

  20. [27]

    Programmable self- assembly in a thousand-robot swarm,

    M. Rubenstein, A. Cornejo, and R. Nagpal, “Programmable self- assembly in a thousand-robot swarm,” Science, vol. 345, no. 6198, 2014

    2014

  21. [28]

    A vacuum micro- gripping tool with integrated vibration releasing capability,

    W. Rong, Z. Fan, L. Wang, H. Xie, and L. Sun, “A vacuum micro- gripping tool with integrated vibration releasing capability,” Review of Scientific Instruments, vol. 85, no. 8, p. 085002, 2014

    2014

  22. [29]

    Dynamics modeling and residual vibration control of a piezoelectric gripper during wire bonding,

    Z. Long, J. Zhang, Y . Liu, C. Han, Y . Li, and Z. Li, “Dynamics modeling and residual vibration control of a piezoelectric gripper during wire bonding,” IEEE Transactions on Components, Packaging and Manufacturing Technology, vol. 7, no. 12, pp. 2045–2056, 2017

    2017

  23. [30]

    Elastic electroadhesion with rapid release by integrated resonant vibration,

    X. Gao, C. Cao, J. Guo, and A. Conn, “Elastic electroadhesion with rapid release by integrated resonant vibration,” Advanced Materials Technologies, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 1800378, 2019

    2019

  24. [31]

    Vibration control for pivoting by robot hand equipped with cavs and fingervision,

    Y . Suzuki, A. Yamaguchi, S. Nojiri, T. Watanabe, and K. Hashimoto, “Vibration control for pivoting by robot hand equipped with cavs and fingervision,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotic Computing (IRC), 2021, pp. 18–26

    2021

  25. [32]

    Robotic manipulation of thin objects within off-the-shelf parallel grippers with a vibration finger,

    N. Nahum and A. Sintov, “Robotic manipulation of thin objects within off-the-shelf parallel grippers with a vibration finger,” Mechanism and Machine Theory, vol. 177, p. 105032, 2022

    2022

  26. [34]

    Robotic swing-up regrasping manipulation based on the impulse–momentum approach and clqr control,

    A. Sintov, O. Tslil, and A. Shapiro, “Robotic swing-up regrasping manipulation based on the impulse–momentum approach and clqr control,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics , vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 1079– 1090, 2016

    2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.