Page 2 of 6
Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?
Posted: Mon May 12, 2025 1:17 am
by dubois35
@byang Here's the relevant bit as far as I understand it:
Harmonic drives use high reduction ratios (often around 100:1), which gives excellent force density, stiffness, and thermal endurance for continuous-duty lifting - the tradeoff is low backdrivability and some backlash. Field-oriented control (FOC) tuning directly affects how smooth torque output feels - poorly tuned current loops show up as audible whine and jerky low-speed motion, while well-tuned FOC can make even a geared actuator feel fairly fluid.
Makes me wonder how this looks in another five years.
Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?
Posted: Thu May 15, 2025 12:19 am
by erik_novi
From what I've seen:
Backdrivability is the property that lets an external force move a joint without destroying the gearbox or the motor - it's central to both safe human-robot contact and to letting a leg comply naturally when the robot stumbles.
Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?
Posted: Fri May 16, 2025 8:26 am
by jwang
Not sure I fully agree here.
Harmonic drives use high reduction ratios (often around 100:1), which gives excellent force density, stiffness, and thermal endurance for continuous-duty lifting - the tradeoff is low backdrivability and some backlash.
Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?
Posted: Thu May 22, 2025 2:16 pm
by kwilliams
Speaking from personal experience here,
Torque sensing is frequently integrated directly into the actuator housing via strain gauges near the output flange or spring element, rather than bolted on as an external sensor, to save weight and reduce noise from mechanical slop.
Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?
Posted: Wed May 28, 2025 10:01 am
by choi98
@kwilliams Not to derail, but this reminds me of something adjacent:
Field-oriented control (FOC) tuning directly affects how smooth torque output feels - poorly tuned current loops show up as audible whine and jerky low-speed motion, while well-tuned FOC can make even a geared actuator feel fairly fluid. Anti-backlash techniques in production actuators range from mechanical preloading (spring-loaded gear meshes) to purely software compensation that models and corrects for known backlash in the control loop.
Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2025 4:20 am
by nicole57
Minor factual note:
Cycloidal drives are a less common but real alternative to harmonic drives - lower cost at high ratios, decent efficiency, but historically bulkier for the same torque density, which is part of why they haven't fully displaced harmonic drives in commercial hips and knees.
Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?
Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2025 9:34 pm
by benjaminsanchez
@nicole57 Worth being a little skeptical of the marketing angle here.
Quasi-direct drive (QDD) actuators use lower gear ratios (roughly 6:1 to 10:1) paired with high-torque-density motors, trading some peak force density for backdrivability and low reflected inertia, which matters a lot for impact tolerance and fall recovery. Torque sensing is frequently integrated directly into the actuator housing via strain gauges near the output flange or spring element, rather than bolted on as an external sensor, to save weight and reduce noise from mechanical slop.
Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?
Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2025 11:06 am
by charlesbianchi
I'd frame this differently.
Series elastic actuators add a spring element in series with the drivetrain, which gives cheap, precise torque sensing (measure spring deflection) and passive shock absorption, at the cost of reduced control bandwidth and added complexity.
Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2025 5:38 pm
by young56
@charlesbianchi From hands-on experience,
For dynamic walking and recovery, joint control bandwidth in the tens of Hz range is typically necessary to react to a stumble before the center of mass gets too far outside the support polygon. Cycloidal drives are a less common but real alternative to harmonic drives - lower cost at high ratios, decent efficiency, but historically bulkier for the same torque density, which is part of why they haven't fully displaced harmonic drives in commercial hips and knees.
Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2025 8:03 am
by ethan_fisc
Tangent, but worth mentioning:
Torque sensing is frequently integrated directly into the actuator housing via strain gauges near the output flange or spring element, rather than bolted on as an external sensor, to save weight and reduce noise from mechanical slop. Harmonic drives use high reduction ratios (often around 100:1), which gives excellent force density, stiffness, and thermal endurance for continuous-duty lifting - the tradeoff is low backdrivability and some backlash.