This is the second of seven articles in the Automation and Robotics series. The others include What Is Industrial Automation Technology?, History of Robotics, Autonomous Mobile Robots, Industrial Robot Programming, Automated Factory Guide, and Robotics Commercial Off-the-Shelf Software. End effectors for robots, also known as end of arm tooling (EOAT), are robotic arm attachments that enable the robot to perform its work, whether it’s grabbing products to pack them in boxes, inspecting products with sensors, or helping to manufacture through welding, grinding, or other tools. While many end effectors go through predetermined tool paths, some also feature robotic force compliance abilities, enabling them to interact with, and react to, products and the environment in real time. End effectors are used in a wide range of applications from simple palletizing to complex assembly and finishing. When selecting EOAT, it’s important to consider how it will interact both with the products and the larger manufacturing environment. EOAT continues to evolve and become more accessible to smaller manufacturers, with developments like more cost-effective systems and interchangeable grippers to enable greater flexibility. In this article, we’ll be covering: What Is an End Effector? (EOAT Meaning) End of Arm Tooling Types Robotic Force Compliance Devices End of Arm Tooling Applications Choosing the Right EOAT Trends in End Effectors for Robotics Moving Forward with EOAT What Is an End Effector? (EOAT Meaning) End effectors, also known as end of arm tooling for robots (or EOAT), are devices that attach to the end of a robotic arm which interact with the environment. This tooling enables robots to grasp, manipulate, sense, or perform a process on a part (Tedrake), such as polishing or pick-and place operations. EOATs vary in complexity from simple grippers to sophisticated sensors and process tools. The original end effectors of the 1960s were purpose-built for a single application. Today, standard, off-the-shelf EOAT is more flexible to handle a wider range of applications. These standard solutions are less expensive and easier to deploy than custom options because they often come ready to plug and play. This quick changeover can be useful to smaller shops that switch lines daily and weekly. EOAT is also getting smarter, with integrated sensing, vision technology, and artificial intelligence. “High production shops can take their time to engineer an optimized solution for a particular application,” Thomas Reek vice president of sales - automation at SCHUNK, says. “But shops that are constantly changing don’t have time for the up-front engineering time. They need to switch fast to be profitable, so tooling needs to be adaptable for many jobs.” End of Arm Tooling Types The main types of end of arm tooling for robots include grippers, process tools, and sensors. Grippers, which pick up and move objects, are the most commonly used, while process tools such as welders and lubricant applicators aid in the manufacturing process. Sensors can range from force and torque sensing to infrared cameras and machine vision. End Effector Grippers The most common EOAT is the gripper, which can pick up and manipulate objects and is typically used for pick-and-place, assembly, and machine tending operations. Grippers are usually sorted into four main categories: vacuum, pneumatic, hydraulic, and electric. Soft and flexible fingered grippers are also a growing category. Vacuum Grippers Vacuum grippers use the difference between atmospheric pressure and a vacuum to lift, hold, and move objects. These are also the standard EOAT used in manufacturing due to their high level of flexibility. Vacuum grippers are used to automate a wide range of tasks; one of the most widespread applications is packaging and palletizing. Pneumatic Grippers Pneumatic grippers are popular due to their compact size, light weight, low cost, and ability to operate in tight spaces. They can be either opened or closed and use compressed air and pistons to operate their jaws, also called fingers. Other advantages include their large grip force range and rapid response times. Hydraulic Grippers Hydraulic grippers provide the most strength and are used for applications that require significant amounts of force. While they’re simple to install, they require more maintenance thanks to their use of pressurized fluid to move pistons. Electric Grippers Electric grippers do not provide the same level of gripping power as hydraulic grippers, but they are suitable for applications that require high speed and light-to-moderate gripping force, including machine tending and pick-and-place applications. The most significant feature of electric grippers for manufacturing automation is the level of control they enable. The term “electric gripper” is commonly used interchangeably with "servo-electric gripper.” Soft and Flexible Finger Grippers Soft-fingered and flexible finger grippers are an emerging category. Both can feature sensors in each finger to detect the object’s shape, and they are able to pick up irregular or delicate products such as food, However, flexible grippers also come in a ball shape, known as a universal gripper. Like a bean bag chair, universal grippers are made up of a flexible “skin” filled with granular material. They envelop an object, then vacuum suction themselves to it to ensure they’re holding it tightly until it needs to be released (Chitroda). Electric tooling has a major advantage over the more traditional pneumatic grippers, according to IMTS supplier OnRobot, especially for first-time robot users. “To change over to a new part, pneumatic grippers must be replaced, which takes time and money,” says Kristian Hulgard, general manager – Americas at OnRobot. “Electric tools are simpler and less expensive to redeploy with a robotic arm for different tasks because it just requires a change in software settings for a single tool.” Tomenson Machine Works, a manufacturer of precision hydraulic manifolds in West Chicago, used an OnRobot electric gripper on a collaborative robot (cobot) for pin stamping and engraving for its first foray into robotics. Because the electric gripper is adaptive, it can switch between the shop’s wide range of parts with simple software settings, avoiding time-consuming changeovers and allowing workers to be relocated on parts with complex processes and longer cycles. Since the incorporation of these capabilities, the company is more comfortable bidding on smaller jobs and can think about expanding its automation. EOAT Process Tools Other robot end of arm tooling performs removal or deposition operations like grinding, welding, and painting. Examples include: Welding tools are common in automotive for accurate, repeatable welds. Deburring, grinding, and sanding tools are used for smoothing and finishing surfaces. Cutting tools can shape and remove material. Painting tools deliver uniform coatings with less contamination. Dispensers apply adhesives, sealants, and other fluids with precision. 3D printing tools apply layers of material to create objects, using materials from construction concrete to foam and plastics (Keating). End of Arm Tooling Sensors A sensor converts physical stimuli such as heat, vibration, pressure, or proximity into electrical signals, which are then converted into digital data and processed by the computer. A sensor is typically used to produce a variable signal over a measurement range, as opposed to a switch, which generally acts in a binary fashion, e.g., on or off. There are dozens of types of sensors used in EOAT. Some of the most common include vibration, temperature, contact, proximity, pressure, tilt, positioning, motion, and flow sensors. They provide data and information about the physical operating environment, and feedback about the activity and movement of the robotic arm. Common sensor categories include: Ultrasonic sensors use sound waves to detect objects and distances. Proximity sensors detect nearby objects, from metals to liquids, without physical contact. Force or torque sensors monitor the force needed for grippers to hold an object or for the arm to move the object. Light sensors detect brightness, which can be used to track objects even in darker environments. Cameras are best for applications that need precise alignment or positioning. Cameras on end effectors can also include infrared or other special vision properties. Magnetic sensors, also known as hall effect sensors, are useful for detecting the orientation and location of objects containing magnets by tracking magnetic field orientation. Range sensors tell the robot how far it is away from things around it. (Hall). 2D vs. 3D Machine Vision for EOATMachine vision (MV) continues to grow in use as costs fall and processing capabilities increase. 2D vision sensors have been used for decades, and they are well suited to applications involving absence or presence detection, pattern alignment, barcode, and optical character recognition (OCR). The technology is also used for contour-based pattern matching to identify part location, scale, and orientation. Limits to 2D sensors include their inability to measure shape and their sensitivity to lighting conditions. Robotic Force Compliance Devices Robotic force compliance devices can sense the way an object interacts with them for greater accuracy in production. This tooling applies a specific, consistent force to a surface while sensing the way the surface is responding to that force, which is important for applications like grinding and sanding (Launches), where consistent surface pressure that adjusts with the surface level, rather than toolpath, is important to avoid uneven finishes. It’s also useful in assembly, where the robot needs to sense a part’s orientation with more precision. Robotic force compliance isn’t required for all situations, though: if your application only needs the tooling to follow a fixed path regardless of external forces, non-force compliant tooling will work just fine. Active vs. Passive Force Compliance While active force compliance EOAT is more accurate and responsive, passive compliance tooling is less expensive and more reliable for less complex applications. Active compliance uses a closed system of force sensors to monitor the amount of force currently being applied in comparison to how much force the robot should be applying, allowing it to adjust the tool path it’s taking to align with the theoretical one it’s following. This allows the robot to maintain precise force application across irregular surfaces. Active EOAT adapts in real-time, compensates for gravity, and ensures consistent performance across complex geometries. This is essential in high-precision tasks such as deburring and grinding, where either extremely large or extremely small amounts of force are needed. Active compliance settings are the best fit when flexibility and responsiveness are critical. Passive compliance tooling, on the other hand, simply reacts to an object in real time, using a regulator to change air pressure for exerting force. These are more commonly used, easier and less expensive to integrate, and require less maintenance, though the tradeoff is their lesser degree of flexibility and accuracy (Automated). Passive compliance is better for predictable or flat surfaces. It’s often integrated with safety features for collision detection or torque limitation, ideal for human-robot collaboration (Amaya-Mejia). End of Arm Tooling Applications End of arm tools are used across industries for: Pick and place: fast, repetitive tasks using vacuum or mechanical grippers (standard bots). Packaging and palletizing: transferring parts or products into packaging or from conveyors onto pallets (Formic). Machine tending: loading and unloading parts from equipment like computer numerical control (CNC) machines. Assembly: handling multi-material, multi-size parts, including at high speeds. Quality testing and inspection: high-precision, force-controlled defect identification using sensors. Surface finishing: deburring, sanding, and polishing with consistent force, even across variable surfaces (Ma). Choosing the Right EOAT To figure out what type of robot end of arm tooling you need, it’s important to think about how the tooling will interact with the product being manufactured and how it will function within the rest of the manufacturing system, including employees. Key factors include: Compatibility with the robot’s mechanical and control interfaces Environmental conditions Application-specific requirements like part fragility or throughput demands End of arm tools must not only physically fit the robot but also integrate well with power, communication, and control systems while ensuring safe, consistent, and efficient operation. The type and variety of product being manufactured is another crucial factor. EOAT must adapt to differences in part size, shape, surface texture, and fragility, as well as the speed of production. Decisions will need to be made around whether to select for single or multi-part handling as well. For high-mix parts, you’ll also need to consider whether tool changes or reconfiguration will be necessary. For example, vacuum grippers offer high flexibility for compatible parts and are useful for simple pick-and-place operations. In contrast, multi-sided tools or tool changers offer broader versatility for complex, high-mix tasks, though often at the cost of higher investment and increased cycle times. Finally, if you’re automating for irregular parts, high speeds, or materials that are difficult to work with, a custom system will be more efficient in the long run. Advanced tooling solutions that incorporate machine learning or sensor feedback can increase performance, especially in environments where human-robot collaboration or variable product handling is required. However, if all you need is simple pick-and-place work, you can get end of arm tooling off the shelf to save time and budget (Meader). Trends in End Effectors for Robotics As each new IMTS show demonstrates, end of arm tooling continues to evolve and become more accessible. Some of the latest innovations include vision-free force compliance tooling, automated finger changers for grippers, and 3D-printed parts. Robotic Force Compliance Tooling As one example of how robotic force compliance is evolving, ATI Industrial Automation has introduced the CGV-900 Axially Compliant Finishing Tool for grinding and finishing applications. Pneumatic pistons in the tool provide a constant force to make contact with the work surface. This allows the tool to automatically adjust the angle and pressure to accommodate slight variations in the parts without using a vision system. The resulting parts are consistently compliant to their required specs. ATI says the CGV-900 is ideal for automotive spot-welding cleanup, metal fabrication, and foundry applications. It’s a convenient tool especially for small- and medium-sized companies with high-mix and low-volume applications. “Enterprises without their own automation teams don’t have the capital or labor to add a complex vision system that costs $50,000, and it requires a lot of programming and maintenance,” says Tim Burns, senior application engineer for material removal products at ATI. “They need a quicker return on investment to stay competitive, so the CGV-900 provides a simpler solution for one sixth the cost. Plus, it’s lighter and smaller than traditional EOAT grinders, so it’s easier for the robot to manipulate it.” Gripper Innovations Meanwhile, innovations in grippers such as automated finger changers and integrated finger sensors are making their way into the market. Kurt Manufacturing, well known for its workholding products since the 1950s, entered the EOAT market in 2022 with the introduction of its pneumatic RV36 gripper at IMTS. The two-finger parallel gripper features a first-of-its-kind design with automated finger changes on a single gripper body. The adaptable gripper uses pull studs for fast finger changes to accommodate different applications without operator intervention. Integrated electronics with sensors in the gripper ensure the fingers are locked in place. To expand its offering, the company is currently developing a three-finger model and a smaller version of the RV36 two-finger parallel gripper for smaller robots and part applications. “Our customers are exploring a wider range of automation options that require grippers that sense force and part presence for lights-out manufacturing applications,” says Chuck Milam, industrial products sales manager for Kurt. “Sensors built into the gripper can help time out production if a part isn't picked properly or a finger change malfunctions, saving on machine downtime and wasted materials.” Widening EOAT Accessibility Large companies are still the biggest consumers of EOAT today, but we can expect smaller shops to grow quickly as robots become less expensive and easier to use. EOAT makers are finding ways to meet a wide variety of needs in capabilities, price, and complexity. Also, 3D printing is expected to play a bigger role as manufacturers print their own custom EOAT. Siemens has already created tooling design simulation software to help engineers calculate environmental and development costs of additive manufactured parts. To continue following developments in end effectors and other robotics innovation, sign up for our newsletter. Moving Forward with EOAT While end of arm tooling comes in a wide variety of types to enable everything from manufacturing to packaging, it's important to choose the type that will best fill existing needs in your facility, whether that’s to increase worker safety, more quickly handle fragile products, or accelerate your production line. While current EOAT comes in both standard and custom varieties, the amount of options will only continue to grow as this fast-moving field continues to evolve. Next up in this series on industrial automation: learn more about how modern industrial robots developed over the 20th century in our History of Robotics. Read the Automation and Robotics Series What Is Industrial Automation Technology? History of Robotics: Robotics Generations, Coding, and More Autonomous Mobile Robots: Companies, Types, and Advantages Industrial Robot Programming: Teach Pendant, Robot Simulator & Languages Automated Factory Guide: Lights-Out & Dark Manufacturing Robotics Commercial Off-the-Shelf Software: Robot Operating System, Cenit, and MoreOther Automation/Robotics Articles Sources: Amaya-Mejia, Lina Maria et al. “Vision-Based Safety System for Barrierless Human-Robot Collaboration.” (2022, August 3). Cornell University. “ATI Launches New Product Family with Force Control Devices.” ATI Industrial Automation. Accessed July 11, 2025. Chitroda, Meet, and Bhumeshwar Patle. “A Review on Technologies in Robotic Gripper.” (2023, May). International Journal of Advanced Engineering and Nano Technology. Accessed July 11, 2025. Hall, David J. “Robotic Sensing Devices.” (1984, March). The Robotics Institute at Carnegie-Mellon University. Accessed July 11, 2025. Hegarty, Philip. “Automated Palletizing: How It Works and How To Do It.” (2023, August 16). Formic. Accessed July 11, 2025. Keating, Steven. “Renaissance Robotics: Novel Applications of Multipurpose Robotic Arms Spanning Design Fabrication, Utility, and Art.” (2012, September). Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Accessed July 11, 2025. Ma, Zheng, Aun-Neow Poo, et. Al. Design and Control of an End-Effector for Industrial Finishing Applications. (2018). Science Direct. Accessed July 11, 2025. Meader, Jordan. “What You Need to Know About Robot End of Arm Tooling.” Automation World. (2025, March 24). Accessed July 11, 2025. “Robotic Grinding for High-Mix Manufacturing.” Suhner. Accessed July 11, 2025. “The Automated Future of Material Removal.” ATI Industrial Automation. Accessed July 11, 2025.
Learn about end effectors for robots, AKA end of arm tooling (EOAT), including types, applications, robotic force compliance, and how to choose which EOAT you need.
Subscribe to Newsletters
Get the latest news from IMTS delivered to your inbox.