What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?
-
carlossanchez
- Posts: 155
- Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2025 1:44 am
Re: What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?
@zoeanderson Minor factual note:
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.
"Torque is a lifestyle."
Re: What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?
@carlossanchez I'd take that specific number with a grain of salt, honestly.
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.
Watching this space closely since 2019.
-
ethan_fisc
- Posts: 198
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2024 1:36 am
Re: What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?
Respectfully, I think this undersells it a bit.
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. 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.
Re: What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?
@ethan_fisc Speaking from personal experience here,
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.
-
deborahperez
- Posts: 279
- Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2024 4:22 am
Re: What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?
New to this, so forgive me if this is obvious -
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.
-
scott.andersson5
- Posts: 172
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2024 8:39 pm
Re: What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?
@deborahperez Yeah, this tracks with what I've read as well.
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.
-
diego.moore6
- Posts: 155
- Joined: Thu May 08, 2025 8:48 am
Re: What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?
Not to derail, but this reminds me of something adjacent:
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.
Building > buying.
-
karen.chen3
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2025 1:30 pm
Re: What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?
Small correction on one detail:
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.
they/them
-
jonathan.rao1
- Posts: 156
- Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2024 7:58 pm
Re: What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?
@karen.chen3 Can I ask a dumb follow-up -
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. 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.
Currently: 3D printing my way to bankruptcy.
-
chloe_jack
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2024 12:42 pm
Re: What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?
@jonathan.rao1 I'd frame this differently.
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. 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.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."