Torque ripple mitigation - control tricks vs mechanical fixes

Harmonic drives, quasi-direct drive, series elastic actuators, motor selection, gearing, and everything that makes joints move.
rtorres
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2026 1:31 am

Torque ripple mitigation - control tricks vs mechanical fixes

Post by rtorres »

Something I keep coming back to and can't quite settle on my own. Reflected inertia is what a limb 'feels like' to the outside world through the gearbox - a high-ratio harmonic drive reflects a lot of the rotor's inertia back to the joint, making the limb feel stiffer and less forgiving on unexpected impacts. Boston Dynamics' commercial electric Atlas switched fully from hydraulic to QDD-style electric actuation, ending up quieter and lighter with comparable or better dynamic performance than the old hydraulic platform. Interested in both agreement and pushback here.
Opinions my own, not my employer's.
johnrossi
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2025 2:39 am

Re: Torque ripple mitigation - control tricks vs mechanical fixes

Post by johnrossi »

This is exactly the kind of context I was looking for. 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.
she/her
mohammed64
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2025 9:56 am

Re: Torque ripple mitigation - control tricks vs mechanical fixes

Post by mohammed64 »

Tangent, but worth mentioning: 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. 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.
he/him | robotics hobbyist since the DARPA Grand Challenge days
kim37
Posts: 109
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2025 11:21 pm

Re: Torque ripple mitigation - control tricks vs mechanical fixes

Post by kim37 »

@mohammed64 From what I've seen: 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.
chloe_jack
Posts: 176
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2024 12:42 pm

Re: Torque ripple mitigation - control tricks vs mechanical fixes

Post by chloe_jack »

@kim37 I see it a little differently. Backdrivability is the property that lets an external force move a joint without destroying the gearbox or the motor - it's central to both safe human-robot contact and to letting a leg comply naturally when the robot stumbles.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."
freya.smith
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2026 5:28 pm

Re: Torque ripple mitigation - control tricks vs mechanical fixes

Post by freya.smith »

Agreed, and I'd add: 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. A lot of the per-joint cost in a modern actuator isn't the motor - it's the combination of a precision gearbox, integrated encoders, torque sensing, and the driver electronics, all of which have to fit inside a housing the size of a fist.
she/her
matthew.yamamoto0
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2025 8:43 pm

Re: Torque ripple mitigation - control tricks vs mechanical fixes

Post by matthew.yamamoto0 »

Here's the relevant bit as far as I understand it: 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.
"Torque is a lifestyle."
nancy_lewi
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2025 1:11 pm

Re: Torque ripple mitigation - control tricks vs mechanical fixes

Post by nancy_lewi »

@matthew.yamamoto0 Yeah, this tracks with what I've read as well. 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. 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. Totally unrelated but has anyone else noticed how fast component costs are dropping this year.
"Torque is a lifestyle."
deborahperez
Posts: 279
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2024 4:22 am

Re: Torque ripple mitigation - control tricks vs mechanical fixes

Post by deborahperez »

@nancy_lewi I can speak to this a bit. 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. This whole thread is a good reminder how young this field still is.
james15
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2025 3:39 am

Re: Torque ripple mitigation - control tricks vs mechanical fixes

Post by james15 »

Minor factual note: 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. Totally unrelated but has anyone else noticed how fast component costs are dropping this year.
Post Reply