Page 2 of 2
Re: What's underrated: cell chemistry or BMS software, for overall pack reliability?
Posted: Mon Feb 03, 2025 12:18 am
by olga_lind
Tangent, but worth mentioning:
Thermal margin in a densely packed humanoid chassis is often the real limiting factor on sustained performance, not raw motor power - actuators get thermally throttled well before they'd hit their absolute torque limits, especially during repeated high-load cycles like continuous lifting.
Makes me wonder how this looks in another five years.
Re: What's underrated: cell chemistry or BMS software, for overall pack reliability?
Posted: Tue Feb 04, 2025 7:40 am
by choi98
From what I've seen:
Hot-swappable battery packs solve the runtime bottleneck for continuous operations (like a 24/7 warehouse shift) without needing a much bigger, heavier pack, but they add mechanical complexity, a failure-prone connector interface, and logistics overhead for managing spare packs.
Makes me wonder how this looks in another five years.
Re: What's underrated: cell chemistry or BMS software, for overall pack reliability?
Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2025 6:36 am
by pierregreen
@choi98 This raises a question for me -
DC-DC conversion losses across all the individual actuator drivers add up across a whole robot - it's a less glamorous efficiency question than battery chemistry, but power electronics efficiency meaningfully affects real-world runtime too.
Re: What's underrated: cell chemistry or BMS software, for overall pack reliability?
Posted: Wed Feb 12, 2025 9:37 am
by dchen
Respectfully, I think this undersells it a bit.
DC-DC conversion losses across all the individual actuator drivers add up across a whole robot - it's a less glamorous efficiency question than battery chemistry, but power electronics efficiency meaningfully affects real-world runtime too.