Anyone using ultrasonic sensors for close-range obstacle detection still, or is that obsolete?

IMUs, force/torque sensors, depth cameras, LiDAR, tactile skin, SLAM, and state estimation.
jonathan.rao1
Posts: 156
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2024 7:58 pm

Re: Anyone using ultrasonic sensors for close-range obstacle detection still, or is that obsolete?

Post by jonathan.rao1 »

@chloe_jack That's the official framing, at least - reality tends to lag a bit. 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. 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.
Currently: 3D printing my way to bankruptcy.
forgesve15
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2026 4:32 am

Re: Anyone using ultrasonic sensors for close-range obstacle detection still, or is that obsolete?

Post by forgesve15 »

Still learning the space, so correct me if wrong - 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.
freya.smith
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2026 5:28 pm

Re: Anyone using ultrasonic sensors for close-range obstacle detection still, or is that obsolete?

Post by freya.smith »

Ran into exactly this myself. 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.
she/her
gary.tanaka2
Posts: 86
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2025 2:35 pm

Re: Anyone using ultrasonic sensors for close-range obstacle detection still, or is that obsolete?

Post by gary.tanaka2 »

@freya.smith Here's what I know on this: 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. 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.
timothy.roberts2
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2026 2:26 am

Re: Anyone using ultrasonic sensors for close-range obstacle detection still, or is that obsolete?

Post by timothy.roberts2 »

@gary.tanaka2 Slight correction, though the overall point stands: 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 | grad student, biped locomotion
Post Reply