Why is 2 hours still the realistic runtime ceiling for most humanoids?

Battery chemistry, pack design, BMS, runtime, charging/swapping, and keeping actuators from cooking themselves.
deborahperez
Posts: 279
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2024 4:22 am

Re: Why is 2 hours still the realistic runtime ceiling for most humanoids?

Post by deborahperez »

New to this, so forgive me if this is obvious - Distributed power architectures (multiple smaller packs or local capacitor buffering near high-draw actuators) can reduce peak current demands on the main bus and improve fault isolation, at the cost of added complexity versus a single central pack. Higher-voltage power architectures reduce resistive losses and current draw through the wiring harness for a given power level, which is part of why some newer platforms are moving away from lower-voltage packs as total system power demand climbs.
dubois35
Posts: 280
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2024 12:01 pm

Re: Why is 2 hours still the realistic runtime ceiling for most humanoids?

Post by dubois35 »

Speaking from personal experience here, Regenerative braking on humanoid joints can recover some energy during deceleration phases of walking, but the actual energy recovered is modest compared to a vehicle, since humanoid joints don't sustain the same continuous high-speed rotation that makes regen worthwhile in EVs. A BMS (battery management system) has to guard against transient current spikes from sudden gait changes or lifting motions, not just steady-state draw - peak current headroom and fast-acting protection logic matter as much as total capacity for real-world duty cycles.
they/them
Post Reply