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

IMUs, force/torque sensors, depth cameras, LiDAR, tactile skin, SLAM, and state estimation.
olga_lind
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2024 12:11 pm

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

Post by olga_lind »

@ethan17 Side note that might be relevant: 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.
camila.jackson0
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2024 1:27 am

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

Post by camila.jackson0 »

@olga_lind Can I ask a dumb follow-up - Event cameras (which report per-pixel brightness changes rather than full frames) are still more of a research curiosity than a production sensor for humanoids, mainly because the software ecosystem and processing pipelines around them are far less mature than for standard frame-based cameras.
Building > buying.
carol.robinson
Posts: 153
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2025 11:36 am

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

Post by carol.robinson »

I can speak to this a bit. 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.
they/them
johnrossi
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2025 2:39 am

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

Post by johnrossi »

I dealt with almost this exact situation. 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. 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.
she/her
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 »

@johnrossi I'll believe the stronger version of that claim when it's independently verified. 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.
mia_lars
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2024 11:00 am

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

Post by mia_lars »

Genuinely curious - 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. Reminds me a bit of the early drone hobbyist scene, honestly.
Watching this space closely since 2019.
lbianchi
Posts: 81
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2025 6:56 pm

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

Post by lbianchi »

Minor factual note: IMU drift over time (bias instability) is usually the real culprit behind slowly diverging state estimates, not noise - it's typically handled with sensor fusion against other references (visual odometry, joint kinematics) rather than trying to eliminate drift at the source.
dubois35
Posts: 280
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2024 12:01 pm

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

Post by dubois35 »

@lbianchi Worth being a little skeptical of the marketing angle here. Tactile skin arrays have improved a lot, but 'good enough to matter' really depends on the task - coarse contact detection across a large area is fairly mature, while fine, high-resolution force distribution sensing (like a human fingertip) is still the harder problem. Depth sensing range and reliability both degrade outdoors in direct sunlight for most structured-light and active stereo cameras, since the ambient IR washes out the projected pattern - it's a real limitation for humanoids intended for anything beyond indoor, controlled environments.
they/them
cynthia.muller
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2025 8:23 pm

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

Post by cynthia.muller »

@dubois35 To answer this directly: 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. Depth sensing range and reliability both degrade outdoors in direct sunlight for most structured-light and active stereo cameras, since the ambient IR washes out the projected pattern - it's a real limitation for humanoids intended for anything beyond indoor, controlled environments.
Opinions my own, not my employer's.
williams84
Posts: 237
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2024 8:50 am

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

Post by williams84 »

Small correction on one detail: 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. Makes me wonder how this looks in another five years.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."
Post Reply