Page 2 of 6
Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2025 11:13 pm
by deborah59
@rossi30 Appreciate the detailed answer.
Proprioception (the robot's sense of its own joint angles, velocities, and forces) tends to get less attention than flashy vision systems, even though a lot of balance and manipulation failures trace back to proprioceptive noise or miscalibration rather than a vision problem.
Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2025 3:34 pm
by jonathan.rao1
@deborah59 Worth being a little skeptical of the marketing angle here.
Proprioception (the robot's sense of its own joint angles, velocities, and forces) tends to get less attention than flashy vision systems, even though a lot of balance and manipulation failures trace back to proprioceptive noise or miscalibration rather than a vision problem.
Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2025 2:56 am
by servoken70
@jonathan.rao1 Yeah, this tracks with what I've read as well.
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: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2025 4:09 pm
by choi98
Related question -
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: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2025 3:15 am
by camila.jackson0
I see it a little differently.
SLAM in a working warehouse is harder than in a controlled lab mainly because the map keeps changing - pallets move, people walk through, lighting shifts near dock doors - so a lot of production systems lean on semi-static maps refreshed periodically rather than pure continuous SLAM.
Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
Posted: Sat Apr 19, 2025 6:14 pm
by rossi30
@camila.jackson0 Related question -
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 sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
Posted: Wed Apr 23, 2025 8:36 am
by williams84
@rossi30 Just to be precise about one thing:
IMU drift over time (bias instability) is usually the real culprit behind slowly diverging state estimates, not noise - it's typically handled with sensor fusion against other references (visual odometry, joint kinematics) rather than trying to eliminate drift at the source.
Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2025 3:51 pm
by choi98
@williams84 Counterpoint:
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.
Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
Posted: Thu May 01, 2025 4:03 pm
by ivan22
@choi98 Yeah, this tracks with what I've read as well.
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: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?
Posted: Fri May 09, 2025 4:26 am
by zoeanderson
One nitpick -
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. 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.