Sensor placement diagrams - anyone have a good reference for a full humanoid?
Sensor placement diagrams - anyone have a good reference for a full humanoid?
This has been on my mind since a conversation I had last week.
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. 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.
Open to being corrected on the specifics.
Watching this space closely since 2019.
Re: Sensor placement diagrams - anyone have a good reference for a full humanoid?
Just to be precise about one thing:
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.
Re: Sensor placement diagrams - anyone have a good reference for a full humanoid?
@hill23 Pretty much this. One thing to add:
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.
he/him | robotics hobbyist since the DARPA Grand Challenge days
-
ronald.clark
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2026 9:05 am
Re: Sensor placement diagrams - anyone have a good reference for a full humanoid?
Genuine beginner question -
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.
-
betty.king
- Posts: 87
- Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2025 8:37 am
Re: Sensor placement diagrams - anyone have a good reference for a full humanoid?
@ronald.clark Appreciate the detailed answer.
SLAM in a working warehouse is harder than in a controlled lab mainly because the map keeps changing - pallets move, people walk through, lighting shifts near dock doors - so a lot of production systems lean on semi-static maps refreshed periodically rather than pure continuous SLAM.
Watching this space closely since 2019.
Re: Sensor placement diagrams - anyone have a good reference for a full humanoid?
@betty.king This is a great summary, thanks.
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. Estimating joint torque from motor current draw is cheap and requires no extra sensor, but it's less accurate than a dedicated torque sensor because it doesn't capture friction losses through the gearbox - good enough for coarse control, not always for precise force-controlled tasks.
Re: Sensor placement diagrams - anyone have a good reference for a full humanoid?
@kim37 Just to be precise about one thing:
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. A minimum viable sensing suite for safe bipedal walking generally includes joint encoders, an IMU for orientation/angular velocity, and either force/torque sensing or accurate current-based torque estimation at the ankles - everything else (vision, tactile, LiDAR) adds capability rather than being strictly required just to stay upright.
she/her
Re: Sensor placement diagrams - anyone have a good reference for a full humanoid?
I dealt with almost this exact situation.
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.
Totally unrelated but has anyone else noticed how fast component costs are dropping this year.
she/her | grad student, biped locomotion
-
barbara_liu
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2026 7:08 am
Re: Sensor placement diagrams - anyone have a good reference for a full humanoid?
@george92 Minor factual note:
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
-
rebecca_lefe
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2025 6:36 am
Re: Sensor placement diagrams - anyone have a good reference for a full humanoid?
Genuine beginner question -
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.
she/her