What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?

IMUs, force/torque sensors, depth cameras, LiDAR, tactile skin, SLAM, and state estimation.
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)?

Post by carlossanchez »

@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."
mia_lars
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2024 11:00 am

Re: What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?

Post by mia_lars »

@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)?

Post by ethan_fisc »

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.
olga_lind
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2024 12:11 pm

Re: What's the realistic detection range for tactile arrays sensing near-contact (not touch)?

Post by olga_lind »

@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)?

Post by deborahperez »

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)?

Post by scott.andersson5 »

@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)?

Post by diego.moore6 »

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)?

Post by karen.chen3 »

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)?

Post by jonathan.rao1 »

@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)?

Post by chloe_jack »

@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."
Post Reply