Tactile fingertip resolution - how fine do we actually need it?

IMUs, force/torque sensors, depth cameras, LiDAR, tactile skin, SLAM, and state estimation.
barbara50
Posts: 178
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2024 12:19 pm

Re: Tactile fingertip resolution - how fine do we actually need it?

Post by barbara50 »

@ethan_fisc Slight correction, though the overall point stands: LiDAR gives reliable, lighting-independent range data but is heavier, pricier, and gives sparser point clouds up close than stereo or depth cameras, which is why a lot of humanoids lean on stereo/depth cameras for near-field manipulation and reserve LiDAR (if present at all) for longer-range navigation. Unitree's Dex3-1 dexterous hand packs around 33 pressure/tactile sensors per hand across the fingers and palm, capable of sensing pressure roughly in the 10g-2500g range - a useful reference point for what 'production tactile sensing' looks like right now.
Opinions my own, not my employer's.
dchen
Posts: 182
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2024 6:51 am

Re: Tactile fingertip resolution - how fine do we actually need it?

Post by dchen »

This matches what I've seen too. Proprioception (the robot's sense of its own joint angles, velocities, and forces) tends to get less attention than flashy vision systems, even though a lot of balance and manipulation failures trace back to proprioceptive noise or miscalibration rather than a vision problem.
scott.andersson5
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2024 8:39 pm

Re: Tactile fingertip resolution - how fine do we actually need it?

Post by scott.andersson5 »

@dchen Here's what I know on this: Force/torque sensors near the ankle give a direct read on ground reaction forces, which is valuable for balance control, but they add cost, a failure point, and routing complexity right at a joint that already takes the most mechanical abuse.
noah_pate
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2024 8:25 pm

Re: Tactile fingertip resolution - how fine do we actually need it?

Post by noah_pate »

@scott.andersson5 Follow-up question though - Multi-camera calibration drifts over time from thermal expansion, vibration, and mechanical wear, which is why production systems typically run periodic recalibration routines rather than assuming a one-time factory calibration holds forever.
giulia.roberts4
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2025 1:06 pm

Re: Tactile fingertip resolution - how fine do we actually need it?

Post by giulia.roberts4 »

@noah_pate Small correction on one detail: Multi-camera calibration drifts over time from thermal expansion, vibration, and mechanical wear, which is why production systems typically run periodic recalibration routines rather than assuming a one-time factory calibration holds forever.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."
ivan22
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2025 11:13 am

Re: Tactile fingertip resolution - how fine do we actually need it?

Post by ivan22 »

@giulia.roberts4 Side note that might be relevant: LiDAR gives reliable, lighting-independent range data but is heavier, pricier, and gives sparser point clouds up close than stereo or depth cameras, which is why a lot of humanoids lean on stereo/depth cameras for near-field manipulation and reserve LiDAR (if present at all) for longer-range navigation.
they/them
sharonschmidt
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2024 7:31 am

Re: Tactile fingertip resolution - how fine do we actually need it?

Post by sharonschmidt »

This is exactly the kind of context I was looking for. Sensor fusion mostly earns its keep by covering for each individual sensor's weaknesses - vision struggles with occlusion and lighting, IMUs drift, force/torque sensors are noisy at low loads - fusing them gives a more robust estimate than any one source alone, independent of raw compute. Vibration is one of the most underrated sources of noisy IMU and tactile readings - mounting matters as much as sensor quality, and a poorly isolated mount can add more noise than the sensor's own datasheet specs would suggest.
Ex-automotive, now full-time robots.
gimbalmar65
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2025 4:14 am

Re: Tactile fingertip resolution - how fine do we actually need it?

Post by gimbalmar65 »

Related question - Sensor fusion mostly earns its keep by covering for each individual sensor's weaknesses - vision struggles with occlusion and lighting, IMUs drift, force/torque sensors are noisy at low loads - fusing them gives a more robust estimate than any one source alone, independent of raw compute.
Currently: 3D printing my way to bankruptcy.
gimbalmar65
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2025 4:14 am

Re: Tactile fingertip resolution - how fine do we actually need it?

Post by gimbalmar65 »

I dealt with almost this exact situation. Unitree's Dex3-1 dexterous hand packs around 33 pressure/tactile sensors per hand across the fingers and palm, capable of sensing pressure roughly in the 10g-2500g range - a useful reference point for what 'production tactile sensing' looks like right now.
Currently: 3D printing my way to bankruptcy.
ethan17
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon May 19, 2025 8:21 pm

Re: Tactile fingertip resolution - how fine do we actually need it?

Post by ethan17 »

Slight correction, though the overall point stands: Vibration is one of the most underrated sources of noisy IMU and tactile readings - mounting matters as much as sensor quality, and a poorly isolated mount can add more noise than the sensor's own datasheet specs would suggest. Latency between a perceived event (like a slip) and a corrective control response matters enormously for balance - even 50-100ms of extra perception latency can be the difference between a smooth recovery and a fall, which is part of why a lot of balance-critical sensing is proprioceptive rather than vision-based.
"Torque is a lifestyle."
Post Reply