What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
-
diego.moore6
- Posts: 155
- Joined: Thu May 08, 2025 8:48 am
Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
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?
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?
@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?
@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?
@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
Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
@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.
Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
@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.
Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
@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?
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
Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
@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