Submitted:
09 February 2026
Posted:
10 February 2026
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Experiment Setup and End-Effector Selection
2.2. Suction Force Equation for the Vacuum Cup End-Effector
2.3. Bending Process and Force Analysis
2.4. Twisting Process and Torque Analysis
2.5. Determination of the Friction Coefficient
2.6. Bending Test and Force Measurement
2.7. Twisting Test and Torque Measurement
2.8. Development of the End-Effector Based on Bending and Twisting Tests
2.9. Whiteness Index Calculation
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Friction Coefficient
3.2. Bending Test Results
3.3. Twisting Test Results
3.4. Comparison of the Minimum Vacuum Pressure for Bending and Twisting
3.5. Final Design and Success Rate of the End-Effector Prototype
3.6. Whiteness Index Evaluation
3.7. Recommended Pressure

4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| Symbol | Description | Unit |
| Ao | Area of the outer circle of the vacuum cup | m² |
| Ai | Area of the inner circle of the vacuum cup | m² |
| Do | Diameter of the outer lip of the vacuum cup | m |
| Di | Diameter of the inner lip of the vacuum cup | m |
| F | Vacuum-generated force during bending | N |
| Fs | Vacuum-generated force during bending | N |
| f | Frictional force resisting relative motion | N |
| H | Vertical distance from contact point to mushroom bottom | m |
| Mt | Total torque exerted during twisting | Nm |
| Pvacuum | Vacuum pressure required for harvesting | Pa |
| Patm | Atmospheric pressure | Pa |
| Psuction | Suction pressure inside the vacuum cup | Pa |
| r | Distance from pivot point to force application point | m |
| r1 | Inner radius of vacuum cup contact area | m |
| r2 | Outer radius of vacuum cup contact area | m |
| X | Horizontal displacement during bending | m |
| α | Bending angle | degrees (°) |
| μ | Friction coefficient between vacuum cup and mushroom cap | - |
| WI | Whiteness Index (indicator of mushroom color quality) | - |
| L∗ | Lightness component in the CIELAB color space | - |
| a∗ | Red–green chromaticity component in CIELAB | - |
| b∗ | Yellow–blue chromaticity component in CIELAB | - |
References
- Alston, J.M.; Pardey, P.G. Public Funding for Research into Specialty Crops. HORTSCIENCE vol. 43 http://www.ers.usda.gov/data/FarmIncome/; (2008).
- USDA-NASS Mushroom annual report; USDA National Agricultural Statistic Service: Washington, D.C., 2023.
- Valverde, J. 3. Valverde, J. Harvesting and Processing of Mushrooms. in Edible and Medicinal Mushrooms 261–270 (2017). [CrossRef]
- Azoyan, A. Feasibility analysis of an automated mushroom harvesting system. 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Koirala, B.; et al. Robotic Button Mushroom Harvesting Systems: A Review of Design, Mechanism, and Future Directions. Applied Sciences 2024, 14, 9229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reed, J.N.; Tillett, R.D. Initial experiments in robotic mushroom harvesting. Mechatronics 1994, 4, 265–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Noble, R.; Reed, J.N.; Miles, S.; Jackson, A.F.; Butler, J. Influence of Mushroom Strains and Population Density on the Performance of a Robotic Harvester. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 1997, 68, 215–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reed, J.N.; Miles, S.J.; Butler, J.; Baldwin, M.; Noble, R. Automatic mushroom harvester development. Journal of Agricultural and Engineering Research 2001, 78, 15–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Noble, R.; Reed, J.N.; Miles, S.; Jackson, A.F.; Butler, J. Influence of Mushroom Strains and Population Density on the Performance of a Robotic Harvester. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 1997, 68, 215–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tillett, R.D.; Batchelor, B.G. An algorithm for locating mushrooms in a growing bed. Comput. Electron. Agric. 1991, 6, 191–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, S.; Ni, B.; Du, W.; Yu, T. Research on an Improved Segmentation Recognition Algorithm of Overlapping Agaricus bisporus. Sensors 2022, 22, 3946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C.; Wang, F.; Cai, Y.; Yi, S.; Zhang, B. An Improved YOLOv5s-Based Agaricus bisporus Detection Algorithm. Agronomy 2023, 13, 1871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Retsinas, G.; Efthymiou, N.; Anagnostopoulou, D.; Maragos, P. Mushroom Detection and Three Dimensional Pose Estimation from Multi-View Point Clouds. Sensors 2023, 23, 3576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wei, B.; et al. Recursive-YOLOv5 Network for Edible Mushroom Detection in Scenes With Vertical Stick Placement. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 40093–40108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dai, Y.; Xiang, C.; Qu, W.; Zhang, Q. A Review of End-Effector Research Based on Compliance Control. Machines 2022, 10, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koirala, B.; et al. A Hybrid Three-Finger Gripper for Automated Harvesting of Button Mushrooms. Actuators 2024, 13, 287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, M.; He, L.; Choi, D.; Pecchia, J.; Li, Y. Picking dynamic analysis for robotic harvesting of Agaricus bisporus mushrooms. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2021, 185, 106145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, S.; Ji, J.; Cai, H.; Chen, H. Modeling and Force Analysis of a Harvesting Robot for Button Mushrooms. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 78519–78526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, K.; et al. Pressure-Stabilized Flexible End-Effector for Selective Picking of Agaricus bisporus. Agriculture 2023, 13, 2256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fantoni, G.; et al. Grasping devices and methods in automated production processes. CIRP Annals 2014, 63, 679–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mbakop, S.; Tagne, G.; Lagache, A.; Youcef-Toumi, K.; Merzouki, R. Integrated design of a bio-inspired soft gripper for mushrooms harvesting. in 2023 IEEE International Conference on Soft Robotics (RoboSoft) 1–6 (IEEE, 2023). [CrossRef]
- Recchia, A.; et al. A Prototype Pick and Place Solution for Harvesting White Button Mushrooms Using a Collaborative Robot. Robotics Reports 2023, 1, 67–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galley, A.; Knopf, G.K.; Kashkoush, M. Pneumatic Hyperelastic Actuators for Grasping Curved Organic Objects. Actuators 2019, 8, 76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tao, K.; Wang, Z.; Yuan, J.; Liu, X. Design of a novel end-effector for robotic bud thinning of Agaricus bisporus mushrooms. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2023, 210, 107880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galley, A.; Knopf, G.K.; Kashkoush, M. Pneumatic Hyperelastic Actuators for Grasping Curved Organic Objects. Actuators 2019, 8, 76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burton, K. Cultural factors affecting mushroom quality – causes and control of bruising. Mushroom Science 2004, 16, 397–402. [Google Scholar]
- Burton Ks, R. T. Brusing: a market effect. Mushroom Journal 2001, 617, 20–22.
- Burton, K.S. Brusing means lost mushroom sales. Mushroom Journal 2002, 624, 23–24. [Google Scholar]
- Weijn, A.; et al. A new method to apply and quantify bruising sensitivity of button mushrooms. Food Sci. Technol. Res. 2012, 47, 308–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, M.; et al. Development of a Robotic Harvesting Mechanism for Button Mushrooms. Trans. ASABE 2021, 64, 565–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Esposito, A. Fluid Power with Applications; Pearson Prentice Hall, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Monkman, G.J.; Hesse, S.; Steinmann, R.; Schunk, H. Robot Grippers; Wiley, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Slosson, J.C.; Yi, H. Characterization of mechanical biomass particle-particle and particle-wall interactions. Preprint at 2025. [Google Scholar]

























| P-vacuum Gauge (kPa) | Success Rate (%) n = 80 |
|---|---|
| -5 | 73 |
| -10 | 83 |
| -15 | 92 |
| -20 | 97 |
| Factor | N | Mean | Standard Deviation | Grouping | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hand Picking | 50 | 43.07 | 2.97 | B | ||
| -5kPa | 50 | 44.38 | 3.09 | A | ||
| -10kPa | 50 | 42.88 | 2.12 | B | ||
| -15kPa | 50 | 42.78 | 2.14 | B | ||
| -20kPa | 50 | 39.79 | 3.29 | C | ||
| Means that not share a letter are significantly different | ||||||
| Factor | N | Mean | Standard Deviation | Grouping | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hand Picking | 50 | 34.05 | 6.73 | A | ||
| -5kPa | 50 | 36.71 | 4.03 | B | ||
| -10kPa | 50 | 37.74 | 3.78 | B | ||
| -15kPa | 50 | 38.22 | 3.97 | B | ||
| -20kPa | 50 | 28.72 | 6.89 | C | ||
| Means that not share a letter are significantly different | ||||||
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).