Lasso Gripper: A String Shooting-Retracting Mechanism for Shape-Adaptive Grasping

Peng Lu; Qiyuan Qiao; Xiyu Fan; Yu Wang

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 23 references

Lasso Gripper: A String Shooting-Retracting Mechanism for Shape-Adaptive Grasping

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proposes a string-shooting, string-retracting "lasso gripper" and claims it grasps oversized, delicate, and moving objects with a drag-supported loop that extends a robot arm's workspace by 157 percent.

desk verdict The mechanism is a real new gripper concept; the modeling and workspace numbers are fitted and arbitrary, so treat them as illustrative, not validated. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.14163 v1 pith:6QV5FIMP submitted 2025-06-17 cs.RO

Qiyuan Qiao , Yu Wang , Xiyu Fan , Peng Lu This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.RO

keywords lassogripperstringloopgraspingshape-adaptiveair-dragsupportedworkspaceextensiondelicateobjectmanipulationunderactuatedshooter

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

This paper proposes a gripper that shoots and retracts a loop of string, like a mechanical lasso, to grasp objects. It argues that because the loop wraps around a target, the grasp force is spread along the string instead of concentrated at two fingertips, so oversized, irregular, and delicate objects can be carried without crushing. The load-bearing physics is a drag-supported loop: at launch speed, air drag on the string balances gravity and holds the loop open, and the paper fits this loop model to measured curves. On a six-axis arm, this loop adds reach beyond the arm's fingertips, enlarging the computed workspace by 157 percent. The demonstrations show the gripper lifting animal figures, vegetables, balloons, and a thrown balloon mid-air.

What carries the argument

The central object is the drag-supported string loop. A short segment of string is treated as a 2D curve in a Frenet-Serret frame subject to its weight $\mu ds\,\vec{g}$, tension $d(T\vec{\tau})/ds\,ds$, and linear air drag $-f\vec{\tau}\,ds$. Newton's balance yields an analytic loop shape $z_\pm(x)$ whose curvature is controlled by $R = \mu g/f$, with $x_\pm$ setting loop extent; $R<1$ is required for a finite loop. This curve is what turns the gripper from a point at the arm's tip into an extended reachable set, and it is the quantity whose fitted version is checked against experimental silhouettes.

What would settle it

Videotape the free loop at several launch speeds, extract the loop boundary, and test whether a single fitted $(R, x_+, x_-)$ reproduces all shapes; if $R$ must be changed with speed or the wheel exit constraint alters the loop, the model is fitted rather than predictive.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a string loop launched and retracted by four motor-driven wheels forms a stable, self-supporting loop whose shape is governed by a balance among tension, gravity, and linear air drag, and that this loop can serve as a universal end-effector. In the model, the loop's equilibrium is described by a Frenet-Serret balance that reduces to an integro-differential equation with an analytic solution $z_\pm(x)$ giving the top and bottom halves of the loop; the solution exists only when $R = \mu g/f < 1$, meaning drag outweighs weight. The paper reports that with fitted parameters $[R, x_+, x_-] = [0.33, 0.61\,\mathrm{m}, 0.12\,\mathrm{m}]$, the theoretical curve overlaps the measured loop boundary over 92.23% of the effective range. It then uses the loop as an extension of a six-axis arm and, via 200,000 Monte Carlo samples, reports that the workspace convex hull grows from $3.4620\,\mathrm{m^3}$ to $8.9002\,\mathrm{m^3}$, a 157.08% increase. In experiments, the gripper captures and transports a bull figure by the horns, a horse figure, a cabbage, a chili pepper, a drone, balloons up to 71 cm in diameter, and a balloon thrown through the loop mid-air.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes the string is a perfectly flexible, inextensible 2D curve whose shape is set only by tension, gravity, and a constant linear drag coefficient, even though the gripper's wheels visibly deform the loop and the required ratio $R<1$ is asserted rather than measured.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A single string-loop end-effector can grasp objects larger than the gripper's own opening, because loop size is set by motor speed rather than jaw separation.
Grasping force is a distributed tensile closure rather than concentrated fingertip pressure, so delicate targets such as balloons and vegetables can be lifted without visible deformation.
The dynamic loop model predicts the string's 2D curve from a drag-to-weight ratio $R$, and its fitted curve overlaps the measured loop over 92.23% of the effective range.
Mounted on a six-axis arm, the lasso extends the reachable workspace convex hull from $3.4620\,\mathrm{m^3}$ to $8.9002\,\mathrm{m^3}$, a 157.08% increase.
The gripper can capture moving, airborne objects because the loop's large capture range tolerates position uncertainty.

Reading between the lines

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

If the drag-supported loop model generalizes beyond the fitted case, the same idea could extend to aerial or mobile manipulators, where a lasso end-effector could capture moving targets from a distance rather than requiring the arm to reach them.
The uniform-pressure claim suggests a testable comparison: instrument the string loop with force-sensitive thread or measure contact area, and compare contact stress with a parallel-jaw gripper on the same object.
The loop model could be coupled with vision-based tracking to estimate $R$, $x_+$, and $x_-$ online, turning the static workspace analysis into closed-loop grasping.
Multiple lassos or a net formed by several loops could distribute force further and stabilize large, deformable loads, as the paper hints at for future work.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Short version: read this for the hardware, not for the numbers. A string-shooter loop as a robotic end-effector is a genuinely new grasping mode, and the demonstrations—bull and horse figures, vegetables, a flying balloon—are convincing evidence that the concept works. The four-motor launch/retract design with a winding motor to prevent tangling is thoughtful, and the open-source hardware repo is a plus.

What is actually new: the application of a string loop to grasping, the adjustable loop size via differential wheel speeds, and the demonstration that it can handle oversized, delicate, and moving objects. The comparison against an antipodal gripper on a balloon is a fair qualitative illustration of the gentler-contact claim.

Soft spots, in order of importance. First, the 92.23% loop overlap is fit quality, not prediction: the parameters [R, x+, x-] are adjusted to match the same sampled points used for the comparison. Second, R = mu*g/f is asserted to be < 1, but f is never measured, so the physical basis for the loop shape is untested. Third, the workspace analysis in Sec. III-B switches to arbitrary [0.7, 0.2 m, 0.1 m] with no connection to the fitted state or any launch speed; the resulting 157% volume increase mostly reflects that any roughly 0.2 m reach offset on a 3.46 m^3 hull will inflate the convex hull to about 8.9 m^3. The paper itself acknowledges the retraction wheels alter the loop shape, an effect the model omits. None of these flaws sink the core hardware claim, but they mean the quantitative contributions should be described as illustrative, not validated.

The paper also overclaims "gentle" without force measurements, though the balloon comparison gives anecdotal support. Minor: the writing has some rough spots, but the structure is clear.

Who this is for: roboticists working on novel end-effectors, grasping beyond parallel jaws, or manipulation of non-rigid objects. It deserves a serious referee round because the mechanism is novel and demonstrated; a reviewer should push for predictive validation (held-out loop shape, measured f, repeated trials with error bars) and a workspace analysis that uses the actual fitted parameters. With those fixes, it would be a solid contribution to ICRA or RA-L. As is, I would accept it for peer review but with a request for major revision.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents the Lasso Gripper, a string-shooting and retracting end-effector for robotic grasping. The hardware uses four launch/retract motors plus a central winder, and the authors report a dynamical model of the self-supporting string loop based on prior string-shooter analyses, a workspace-extension analysis via Monte Carlo convex hulls, and qualitative demonstrations of grasping animal figures, vegetables, oversized balloons, and a thrown balloon. The paper's central quantitative claims are a 92.23% overlap between the model and a measured loop in Fig. 6 and a 157.08% workspace volume increase from 3.4620 m^3 to 8.9002 m^3.

Significance. If the hardware demonstrations are representative, the concept is a useful addition to grasping research, particularly for oversized, delicate, or moving objects that conventional antipodal grippers handle poorly. The open-source repository and demonstration video are valuable for reproducibility. However, the quantitative loop-shape and workspace results are not presently validated as predictions: the model parameters are fitted to the same data used for the overlap score, and the workspace calculation uses an unrelated, arbitrary parameter set. The qualitative grasping demonstrations are credible but do not by themselves substantiate the quantitative modeling claims.

major comments (4)

[Section III-A, Fig. 6, Eq. (4)] The 92.23% overlap is a measure of fit quality, not a predictive validation. The parameters [R, x+, x-] = [0.33, 0.61 m, 0.12 m] are adjusted to match the blue sampling points in Fig. 3(B), and the overlap is then computed from those same points. To support the model as a predictive tool, the authors need to validate on held-out loops at different launch speeds, report repeated trials and error bars, or explicitly reframe the result as a best-fit demonstration.
[Section III-A, Eqs. (2)-(4)] The claim that R = µg/f < 1 is asserted without any independent measurement of f, and the paper itself notes in the Fig. 6 text that the retraction wheels constrain the string in a way that differs from the modeling assumption. Since f is not measured and the wheel effects are acknowledged to alter the loop, the quantitative agreement with Eq. (4) does not establish the physical mechanism of aerodynamic support; an independent parameter identification or direct drag measurement is needed before the loop-shape results can be used for workspace analysis.
[Section III-B, Fig. 8] The workspace computation uses [R, x+, x-] = [0.7, 0.2 m, 0.1 m] with no connection to the fitted parameters in Section III-A or to any measured launch speed. The 157.08% volume increase is the ratio of convex hull volumes, where the red workspace points are the furthest loop points at each arm pose; a rigid end-effector extension of comparable length would produce a similar offset. The number therefore does not test the string model and should be re-reported with uncertainty, parameter sensitivity, and a comparison against a simple reach-extension baseline.
[Section IV, Figs. 9-13] The central 'gentle grasp' / 'uniform pressure' claim is supported only by qualitative visual evidence. No force or pressure measurement is reported along the string, and the comparison with the antipodal gripper is a single balloon-deformation observation. Since gentleness is stated as a key advantage over antipodal grippers, this claim should either be supported with quantitative force/pressure measurements or stated as a qualitative demonstration.

minor comments (4)

[Section III-A, Eq. (1)] The term 'd(Tτ)/ds ds3' appears to contain a typo or formatting error; it should likely be 'd(Tτ)/ds ds' or similar.
[Abstract and Section II-B] The abstract says the gripper is controlled by four motors, but Section II-B describes four launch/retract motors plus a central winding motor, i.e., five motors total. This inconsistency should be corrected.
[Section III-A, Fig. 6] The phrase 'the intersection of the union between these two ranges is calculated to be 92.23%' is ambiguous; please define the sets and the overlap metric explicitly, e.g., as a Jaccard index or symmetric difference ratio.
[Section III-B] The Monte Carlo method should report the number of trials, variance of the volume estimate, and the effect of the convex hull approximation; 200,000 samples are stated but no uncertainty is given.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The Sec. III-A loop validation is circular: Eq. 4's shape parameters are adjusted to the same sampled loop and then compared with it, so the 92.23% overlap measures fit quality, not prediction; the 157.08% workspace number is a conditional calculation on arbitrary parameters, while the hardware demonstrations remain independent evidence.

fitted input called prediction [Section III-A, 'Dynamics of the string loop', Eq. 4 and Fig. 6]
"The red curve is drawn according to Eq. 4, where the parameter [R, x+, x−] is adjusted as [0.33, 0.61m, 0.12m]. According to the X-coordinate of the experimental sampling points, a corresponding set of points is selected on the theoretical curve. The two sets of points form an effective grasping range, respectively. The intersection of the union between these two ranges is calculated to be 92.23%."

Eq. 4 contains three shape parameters [R, x+, x−], and the paper explicitly states they are 'adjusted' to match the blue experimental sampling points from Fig. 3(B). The same experimental points are then used, via their X-coordinates, to select theoretical points and to compute a 92.23% overlap. Because the parameters were fit to these very samples, the overlap is a goodness-of-fit statistic for the interpolation, not an independent validation or prediction. R is defined as µg/f, but f is never measured; setting R by fitting the curve makes the R < 1 existence condition an artifact of the fit rather than a measured physical property.

full rationale

The derivation chain has one genuinely circular quantitative link: the claimed validation of Eq. 4 in Section III-A. The three free parameters [R, x+, x−] are adjusted to the experimental loop sampled in Fig. 3(B), and the same points are then used to produce the 92.23% overlap figure; this is a fitted-input-called-prediction. The R<1 condition is likewise ensured by fitting rather than by independent drag-coefficient measurement, so the statement that aerodynamic drag surpasses gravity is not independently supported. The paper's own Fig. 6 note attributes residual error to the retraction-wheel direction constraint, which is one of the effects omitted by the model. The workspace extension in Section III-B is not circular in the same sense: it is a conditional geometric Monte Carlo calculation using a different, explicitly chosen parameter set [0.7, 0.2 m, 0.1 m] and the convex hull of the furthest loop point. The 157.08% figure therefore does not validate the model—it simply computes the geometric consequence of an assumed loop offset, which is a correctness/assumption risk rather than a reduction to the same data. There is no load-bearing self-citation: the dynamics originate from external fluid-mechanics references [21]-[23], and the physical grasping demonstrations (bull/horse figures, vegetables, balloons, moving objects) are independent evidence for the hardware concept. Because the central quantitative agreement claim reduces by construction while the overall hardware contribution stands, the circularity score is 6 (partial circularity), not higher.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The quantitative model rests on three fitted or hand-chosen parameters and several physical assumptions inherited from string-shooter literature. No new theoretical entities such as particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced.

free parameters (3)

R (mu g / f ratio) = 0.33 for loop validation; 0.7 for workspace simulation
Chosen and adjusted to make Eq. 4 match one photographed loop and to define the workspace case study; not measured or predicted.
x+ = 0.61 m for validation; 0.2 m for workspace
Geometry parameter adjusted in Eq. 4 to fit the sampled loop; set arbitrarily for the workspace simulation.
x- = 0.12 m for validation; 0.1 m for workspace
Geometry parameter adjusted in Eq. 4 to fit the sampled loop; set arbitrarily for the workspace simulation.

assumptions (5)

standard math Frenet-Serret frame and Newton's second law for a moving string element.
Background formalism used in deriving Eqs. (1)-(2) in Sec. III-A; accepted mathematical and physical background.
domain assumption The string is a perfectly flexible, one-dimensional curve with no bending stiffness, subject only to tension, gravity, and linear air drag per unit length.
Invoked in the Frenet-Serret derivation of Eqs. (1)-(4) in Sec. III-A; no measurement of bending stiffness or drag coefficient is provided.
domain assumption The aerodynamic drag force always dominates gravity so R = mu g / f < 1, making the self-supporting loop solution finite.
Stated after Eq. (4) as an imperative condition; it is assumed rather than verified from measured f.
domain assumption The loop lies in one vertical plane defined by the ejection direction and gravity, with negligible roll and no effect from the retraction-wheel constraint on the free loop shape.
Used throughout Sec. III-A and III-B; the authors note in Fig. 6 that the retraction wheels cause the actual loop to deviate from this assumption.
domain assumption For the workspace analysis, the loop shape can be attached to the UR5 end effector as a fixed curve with parameters [R, x+, x-] = [0.7, 0.2 m, 0.1 m], and all convex hull points of the sampled loop are reachable.
The Monte Carlo workspace calculation in Sec. III-B assumes this static loop geometry and no dynamic coupling with arm motion.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Lasso Gripper: A String Shooting-Retracting Mechanism for Shape-Adaptive Grasping." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6QV5FIMP

@misc{pith2026250614163,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Lasso Gripper: A String Shooting-Retracting Mechanism for Shape-Adaptive Grasping},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6QV5FIMP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.14163}
}

read the original abstract

Handling oversized, variable-shaped, or delicate objects in transportation, grasping tasks is extremely challenging, mainly due to the limitations of the gripper's shape and size. This paper proposes a novel gripper, Lasso Gripper. Inspired by traditional tools like the lasso and the uurga, Lasso Gripper captures objects by launching and retracting a string. Contrary to antipodal grippers, which concentrate force on a limited area, Lasso Gripper applies uniform pressure along the length of the string for a more gentle grasp. The gripper is controlled by four motors-two for launching the string inward and two for launching it outward. By adjusting motor speeds, the size of the string loop can be tuned to accommodate objects of varying sizes, eliminating the limitations imposed by the maximum gripper separation distance. To address the issue of string tangling during rapid retraction, a specialized mechanism was incorporated. Additionally, a dynamic model was developed to estimate the string's curve, providing a foundation for the kinematic analysis of the workspace. In grasping experiments, Lasso Gripper, mounted on a robotic arm, successfully captured and transported a range of objects, including bull and horse figures as well as delicate vegetables. The demonstration video is available here: https://youtu.be/PV1J76mNP9Y.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.14163 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Traditional lasso and the proposed Lasso Gripper. (A) Traditional lasso is used to catch cattle. Benefiting from the use of horn structure, the loop structure can afford the large pulling force [7]. (B) The string shot by the Lasso Gripper maintains a stable self-supporting loop structure in the air. (C) As the Lasso Gripper is triggered, the string loop structure caught the horns of the bull model. grasping techniq… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Increasing the speed of the driving wheels from (A) to (C), the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Overview of the System: (A) Lasso Gripper with top cover; [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (9 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: The numerical solution of loop curve. To facilitate the solution d [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_5.png]

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The 2D local Frenet-Serret frame is defined on minimal model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: The theoretical curve is verified against the sampling points. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_6.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: The initial robotic arm workspace is marked in green and extended [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_8.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Lasso Gripper string loop is set at the end of UR5 robotic arm. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_7.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Validation of grasping ability via bull and horse figures. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_9.png]

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Validation of grasping ability over variable shapes: drone, cabbage, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_10.png]

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: Validation of grasping ability with oversized objects: inflated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_11.png]

**Figure 13.** Figure 13: The inflated balloon is captured by the antipodal gripper. As a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_13.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

23 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages

[1]

Development of a three-axis gripper force sensor and the intelligent gripper using it

Gab-Soon Kim. Development of a three-axis gripper force sensor and the intelligent gripper using it. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical , 137(2):213–222, July 2007

work page 2007
[2]

Design of effective suction force sensible vacuum gripper by a 6-axis force sensor

Sou Izumi and Shuhei Ikemoto. Design of effective suction force sensible vacuum gripper by a 6-axis force sensor. Artificial Life and Robotics, 29(1):55–61, February 2024

work page 2024
[3]

The Fractal Hand-II: Reviving a Classic Mechanism for Contemporary Grasping Challenges

Malcolm GA Tisdale and Joel W Burdick. The fractal hand-ii: Reviving a classic mechanism for contemporary grasping challenges. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.08766 , 2023

work page Pith review arXiv 2023
[4]

Closing the Loop with Liquid-Metal Sensing Skin for Autonomous Soft Robot Gripping

Jessica Yin, Tess Hellebrekers, and Carmel Majidi. Closing the Loop with Liquid-Metal Sensing Skin for Autonomous Soft Robot Gripping. In 2020 3rd IEEE International Conference on Soft Robotics (RoboSoft), pages 661–667, New Haven, CT, USA, May 2020. IEEE

work page 2020
[5]

DenseTact-Mini: An Optical Tactile Sensor for Grasping Multi-Scale Objects From Flat Surfaces

Won Kyung Do, Ankush Kundan Dhawan, Mathilda Kitzmann, and Monroe Kennedy III. DenseTact-Mini: An Optical Tactile Sensor for Grasping Multi-Scale Objects From Flat Surfaces, September 2023. arXiv:2309.08860 [cs]

work page Pith review arXiv 2023
[6]

Aecom: An aerial continuum manipulator with imu-based kinematic modeling and tendon-slacking prevention

Rui Peng, Zehao Wang, and Peng Lu. Aecom: An aerial continuum manipulator with imu-based kinematic modeling and tendon-slacking prevention. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 53(8):4740–4752, 2023

work page 2023
[7]

California rodeo salinas lasso bull, 2006

David Monniaux. California rodeo salinas lasso bull, 2006. https: //commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:California_ rodeo_Salinas_lasso_bull_p1050544.jpg, Last accessed on 2024-09-10

work page 2006
[8]

A dual-mode and enclosing soft robotic gripper with stiffness-tunable and high-load capacity

Tete Hu, Xinjiang Lu, and Du Xu. A dual-mode and enclosing soft robotic gripper with stiffness-tunable and high-load capacity. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical , 354:114294, 2023

work page 2023

Show all 23 references

[9]

A soft robotic gripper with a belt loop actuated adhesion design for gentle handling of fragile object

Gen Chen, Junsong Wu, Zijian Zhang, Bolun Zhang, Zhongyi Chu, and Jing Cui. A soft robotic gripper with a belt loop actuated adhesion design for gentle handling of fragile object. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 2024

2024
[10]

Design and development of a soft gripper with topology optimization

Hongying Zhang, Michael Yu Wang, Feifei Chen, Yiqiang Wang, A Senthil Kumar, and Jerry YH Fuh. Design and development of a soft gripper with topology optimization. In 2017 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), pages 6239–6244. IEEE, 2017

2017
[11]

Design and Modeling of a Nested Bi-cavity-based Soft Growing Robot for Grasping in Constrained Environments

Haochen Yong, Fukang Xu, Chenfei Li, Han Ding, and Zhigang Wu. Design and Modeling of a Nested Bi-cavity-based Soft Growing Robot for Grasping in Constrained Environments. In 2024 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pages 2346–2352, Yokohama, Japa...

2024
[12]

A low-cost underactuated compliant gripper with multifunctional jaws for precision manipulation

Xiantao Sun, Shang Yang, Yuxia Li, Weihai Chen, and Yan Jin. A low-cost underactuated compliant gripper with multifunctional jaws for precision manipulation. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical , 366:115047, 2024

2024
[13]

The velo gripper: A versatile single-actuator design for enveloping, parallel and fingertip grasps

Matei Ciocarlie, Fernando Mier Hicks, Robert Holmberg, Jeffrey Hawke, Michael Schlicht, Jeff Gee, Scott Stanford, and Ryan Bahadur. The velo gripper: A versatile single-actuator design for enveloping, parallel and fingertip grasps. The International Journal of Robotics Researc...

2014
[14]

A lightweight soft gripper driven by self-sensing super-coiled polymer actuator

Sen Wang, Hongxin Huang, Hailin Huang, Bing Li, and Ke Huang. A lightweight soft gripper driven by self-sensing super-coiled polymer actuator. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , 6(2):2775–2782, 2021

2021
[15]

Olukayode, K.O

O. Olukayode, K.O. Alawode, T.O. Ajewole, and W.O. Adedeji. Design and analysis of a novel light-weight, linear actuator driven flexible PET strips robotic gripper. UNIOSUN Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences, 5(1), March 2023

2023
[16]

A soft gripper with variable stiffness inspired by pan- golin scales, toothed pneumatic actuator and autonomous controller

Tao Sun, Yuanlong Chen, Tianyu Han, Chenlei Jiao, Binbin Lian, and Yimin Song. A soft gripper with variable stiffness inspired by pan- golin scales, toothed pneumatic actuator and autonomous controller. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing , 61:101848, 2020

2020
[17]

Development of a bio-inspired soft gripper with claws

Mingjun Li, Manjia Su, Rongzhen Xie, Yihong Zhang, Haifei Zhu, Tao Zhang, and Yisheng Guan. Development of a bio-inspired soft gripper with claws. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), pages 828–833. IEEE, 2017

2017
[18]

String shooter-string launcher - physics of toys, Home- made Science with Bruce Yeany, 2014

Bruce Yeany. String shooter-string launcher - physics of toys, Home- made Science with Bruce Yeany, 2014. https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=rffAjZPmkuU, Last accessed on 2024-09-07

2014
[19]

How to make a diy string shooter - diy infinity string shooter, 2022

Sine Tech. How to make a diy string shooter - diy infinity string shooter, 2022. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= iMbUSu9IeRw, Last accessed on 2024-09-07

2022
[20]

String shooting device, July 2 2024

Stephen Giovanni Fazio, Austin Mark Hillam, and Mark Gordon Hillam. String shooting device, July 2 2024. US Patent 12,025,399

2024
[21]

String shooter’s overall shape in ambient air

Abello, Margaux, Courson, Juliette, Maury, Arnaud, and Renaud, Julian. String shooter’s overall shape in ambient air. Emergent Scientist, 4:1, 2020

2020
[22]

The charmed string: self-supporting loops through air drag

Adrian Daerr, Juliette Courson, Margaux Abello, Wladimir Toutain, and Bruno Andreotti. The charmed string: self-supporting loops through air drag. Journal of Fluid Mechanics , 877:R2, 2019

2019
[23]

Propelled strings: rising from friction

Nicolas Taberlet, J ´er´emy Ferrand, and Nicolas Plihon. Propelled strings: rising from friction. Physical Review Letters, 123(14):144501, 2019

2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Development of a three-axis gripper force sensor and the intelligent gripper using it

Gab-Soon Kim. Development of a three-axis gripper force sensor and the intelligent gripper using it. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical , 137(2):213–222, July 2007

work page 2007

[2] [2]

Design of effective suction force sensible vacuum gripper by a 6-axis force sensor

Sou Izumi and Shuhei Ikemoto. Design of effective suction force sensible vacuum gripper by a 6-axis force sensor. Artificial Life and Robotics, 29(1):55–61, February 2024

work page 2024

[3] [3]

The Fractal Hand-II: Reviving a Classic Mechanism for Contemporary Grasping Challenges

Malcolm GA Tisdale and Joel W Burdick. The fractal hand-ii: Reviving a classic mechanism for contemporary grasping challenges. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.08766 , 2023

work page Pith review arXiv 2023

[4] [4]

Closing the Loop with Liquid-Metal Sensing Skin for Autonomous Soft Robot Gripping

Jessica Yin, Tess Hellebrekers, and Carmel Majidi. Closing the Loop with Liquid-Metal Sensing Skin for Autonomous Soft Robot Gripping. In 2020 3rd IEEE International Conference on Soft Robotics (RoboSoft), pages 661–667, New Haven, CT, USA, May 2020. IEEE

work page 2020

[5] [5]

DenseTact-Mini: An Optical Tactile Sensor for Grasping Multi-Scale Objects From Flat Surfaces

Won Kyung Do, Ankush Kundan Dhawan, Mathilda Kitzmann, and Monroe Kennedy III. DenseTact-Mini: An Optical Tactile Sensor for Grasping Multi-Scale Objects From Flat Surfaces, September 2023. arXiv:2309.08860 [cs]

work page Pith review arXiv 2023

[6] [6]

Aecom: An aerial continuum manipulator with imu-based kinematic modeling and tendon-slacking prevention

Rui Peng, Zehao Wang, and Peng Lu. Aecom: An aerial continuum manipulator with imu-based kinematic modeling and tendon-slacking prevention. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 53(8):4740–4752, 2023

work page 2023

[7] [7]

California rodeo salinas lasso bull, 2006

David Monniaux. California rodeo salinas lasso bull, 2006. https: //commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:California_ rodeo_Salinas_lasso_bull_p1050544.jpg, Last accessed on 2024-09-10

work page 2006

[8] [8]

A dual-mode and enclosing soft robotic gripper with stiffness-tunable and high-load capacity

Tete Hu, Xinjiang Lu, and Du Xu. A dual-mode and enclosing soft robotic gripper with stiffness-tunable and high-load capacity. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical , 354:114294, 2023

work page 2023