Ballscrew vs rotary actuators for linear joints (ankles, etc)

Harmonic drives, quasi-direct drive, series elastic actuators, motor selection, gearing, and everything that makes joints move.
barbara.jones
Posts: 164
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2025 6:12 pm

Re: Ballscrew vs rotary actuators for linear joints (ankles, etc)

Post by barbara.jones »

@benjaminsanchez Genuinely curious - Encoder resolution requirements scale with how tightly you need to control low-speed motion - coarse encoders are fine for open-loop swing phases but cause visible stutter during precise placement or fine force control. Torque sensing is frequently integrated directly into the actuator housing via strain gauges near the output flange or spring element, rather than bolted on as an external sensor, to save weight and reduce noise from mechanical slop.
he/him | robotics hobbyist since the DARPA Grand Challenge days
kwilliams
Posts: 309
Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2024 1:57 pm

Re: Ballscrew vs rotary actuators for linear joints (ankles, etc)

Post by kwilliams »

@barbara.jones Slight correction, though the overall point stands: Series elastic actuators add a spring element in series with the drivetrain, which gives cheap, precise torque sensing (measure spring deflection) and passive shock absorption, at the cost of reduced control bandwidth and added complexity. For dynamic walking and recovery, joint control bandwidth in the tens of Hz range is typically necessary to react to a stumble before the center of mass gets too far outside the support polygon.
he/him
emilyperez
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2024 8:03 pm

Re: Ballscrew vs rotary actuators for linear joints (ankles, etc)

Post by emilyperez »

This matches what I've seen too. Quasi-direct drive (QDD) actuators use lower gear ratios (roughly 6:1 to 10:1) paired with high-torque-density motors, trading some peak force density for backdrivability and low reflected inertia, which matters a lot for impact tolerance and fall recovery. It's common for a single humanoid to mix actuator types by joint - harmonic drives or hybrid geared actuators at the hips and shoulders where sustained torque matters most, and lower-ratio QDD-style actuators at ankles and knees where backdrivability and impact tolerance matter more.
emilyperez
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2024 8:03 pm

Re: Ballscrew vs rotary actuators for linear joints (ankles, etc)

Post by emilyperez »

Yeah, this tracks with what I've read as well. Harmonic drives use high reduction ratios (often around 100:1), which gives excellent force density, stiffness, and thermal endurance for continuous-duty lifting - the tradeoff is low backdrivability and some backlash.
park44
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2024 12:03 am

Re: Ballscrew vs rotary actuators for linear joints (ankles, etc)

Post by park44 »

@emilyperez I'll believe the stronger version of that claim when it's independently verified. Cycloidal drives are a less common but real alternative to harmonic drives - lower cost at high ratios, decent efficiency, but historically bulkier for the same torque density, which is part of why they haven't fully displaced harmonic drives in commercial hips and knees. Encoder resolution requirements scale with how tightly you need to control low-speed motion - coarse encoders are fine for open-loop swing phases but cause visible stutter during precise placement or fine force control.
she/her
noah_pate
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2024 8:25 pm

Re: Ballscrew vs rotary actuators for linear joints (ankles, etc)

Post by noah_pate »

Pretty much this. One thing to add: Quasi-direct drive (QDD) actuators use lower gear ratios (roughly 6:1 to 10:1) paired with high-torque-density motors, trading some peak force density for backdrivability and low reflected inertia, which matters a lot for impact tolerance and fall recovery. Reminds me a bit of the early drone hobbyist scene, honestly.
chloe_jack
Posts: 176
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2024 12:42 pm

Re: Ballscrew vs rotary actuators for linear joints (ankles, etc)

Post by chloe_jack »

Genuinely curious - Encoder resolution requirements scale with how tightly you need to control low-speed motion - coarse encoders are fine for open-loop swing phases but cause visible stutter during precise placement or fine force control. Makes me wonder how this looks in another five years.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."
benjaminsanchez
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2025 1:58 am

Re: Ballscrew vs rotary actuators for linear joints (ankles, etc)

Post by benjaminsanchez »

Same conclusion I've come to. Also worth noting: Anti-backlash techniques in production actuators range from mechanical preloading (spring-loaded gear meshes) to purely software compensation that models and corrects for known backlash in the control loop. Motor cogging torque (the 'notchy' feel from magnet-to-slot interactions) shows up as small periodic torque ripple that can translate into visible joint jitter at low speeds - it's usually mitigated with skewed magnets, better current control, or software compensation tables.
betty.king
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2025 8:37 am

Re: Ballscrew vs rotary actuators for linear joints (ankles, etc)

Post by betty.king »

Not sure I fully agree here. Field-oriented control (FOC) tuning directly affects how smooth torque output feels - poorly tuned current loops show up as audible whine and jerky low-speed motion, while well-tuned FOC can make even a geared actuator feel fairly fluid.
Watching this space closely since 2019.
jonathan.rao1
Posts: 156
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2024 7:58 pm

Re: Ballscrew vs rotary actuators for linear joints (ankles, etc)

Post by jonathan.rao1 »

@betty.king I don't think that's quite right, for what it's worth. Torque sensing is frequently integrated directly into the actuator housing via strain gauges near the output flange or spring element, rather than bolted on as an external sensor, to save weight and reduce noise from mechanical slop.
Currently: 3D printing my way to bankruptcy.
Post Reply