Page 2 of 3
Re: Joint torque estimation from motor current vs dedicated sensors - accuracy tradeoffs
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by barbara50
Slight correction, though the overall point stands:
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.
Re: Joint torque estimation from motor current vs dedicated sensors - accuracy tradeoffs
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by elarsen69
This raises a question for me -
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.
Re: Joint torque estimation from motor current vs dedicated sensors - accuracy tradeoffs
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by vyoung
Short answer:
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. 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: Joint torque estimation from motor current vs dedicated sensors - accuracy tradeoffs
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by freya.smith
@vyoung This matches something I went through recently.
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.
Re: Joint torque estimation from motor current vs dedicated sensors - accuracy tradeoffs
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by sandra_ivan
@freya.smith Just to be precise about one thing:
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.
Re: Joint torque estimation from motor current vs dedicated sensors - accuracy tradeoffs
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by jchen
@sandra_ivan Appreciate the detailed answer.
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.
Re: Joint torque estimation from motor current vs dedicated sensors - accuracy tradeoffs
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by rossi30
Worth being a little skeptical of the marketing angle here.
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.
Re: Joint torque estimation from motor current vs dedicated sensors - accuracy tradeoffs
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by emily.kumar
@rossi30 Appreciate the detailed answer.
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.
Re: Joint torque estimation from motor current vs dedicated sensors - accuracy tradeoffs
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by dorothy_kuma
Short answer:
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.
Re: Joint torque estimation from motor current vs dedicated sensors - accuracy tradeoffs
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by zoeanderson
@dorothy_kuma One nitpick -
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. 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.