What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

IMUs, force/torque sensors, depth cameras, LiDAR, tactile skin, SLAM, and state estimation.
diego.moore6
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu May 08, 2025 8:48 am

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Post by diego.moore6 »

This raises a question for me - 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. 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.
jonathan.rao1
Posts: 156
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2024 7:58 pm

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Post by jonathan.rao1 »

Side note that might be relevant: 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.
barbara.jones
Posts: 164
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2025 6:12 pm

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Post by barbara.jones »

@jonathan.rao1 I see it a little differently. 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.
he/him | robotics hobbyist since the DARPA Grand Challenge days
carlossanchez
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2025 1:44 am

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Post by carlossanchez »

@barbara.jones I can speak to this a bit. 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. 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.
"Torque is a lifestyle."
sarah.santos3
Posts: 213
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2025 5:30 am

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Post by sarah.santos3 »

@carlossanchez Respectfully, I think this undersells it a bit. 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. 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
barbara50
Posts: 178
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2024 12:19 pm

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Post by barbara50 »

@sarah.santos3 This matches something I went through recently. 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.
Opinions my own, not my employer's.
deborah59
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2024 9:37 am

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Post by deborah59 »

@barbara50 Pretty much this. One thing to add: 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.
Ex-automotive, now full-time robots.
dchen
Posts: 182
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2024 6:51 am

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Post by dchen »

@deborah59 This matches something I went through recently. 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. 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. Reminds me a bit of the early drone hobbyist scene, honestly.
charlesbianchi
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2025 2:51 am

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Post by charlesbianchi »

Minor factual note: 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. 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.
she/her
ivan22
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2025 11:13 am

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Post by ivan22 »

@charlesbianchi Here's what I know on this: 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. 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.
they/them
Post Reply