Manipulators: Claws are old news!

[Kris Verdeyen]

The main problem I have with this article is the following:

They were developed through a project called OCTOR (sOft robotiC manipulaTORs)

So we can just pick any letter we want to make acronyms now? Why even make it an acronym at all? Why not call the robot "Octor" and the project "Soft Robotic Manipulators"?

Actually, now that I think of it, this could be kinda cool. My personal mission statement, "Not every project needs an acronym," previously abbreviated as the lackluster "NEPNAA" could instead be "nOt everY PrOject needs an acronYm" or "OY PONY!"

[KenWittlief]

In the real world engineers come up with the awesome acronyms first, then come up with projects to fit the acronym!

I guess SOCTOR didnt cut it

or SOROMAN

[Qbranch]

That manipulator needs some work. It could really use some servovalves instead of using solenoids.

Good start, but still needs work.

-Q

[IA-Howitzer]

Ya, obvisouly for their acronym, they wanted something a little catchy. I'd KISS and staywith SOFT. Of course, no one would want that... But, I agree with someof the previous things said. A pnumatic suction system is not as good as some type of claw.

Plus, I bet if a few robotics teams came together and pooled their resources, we could come up with a more efficient and effective design then an air-powered grabber.

I still think a crane or claw-type mechanism would work a lot better than the air... I wonder how much psi they get in thoes tanks?