Page 2 of 2

Re: Why do so many humanoids use different actuator types for hips vs ankles?

Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2025 2:39 pm
by scott.novikova7
@hill23 Agreed, and I'd add: Motor cogging torque (the 'notchy' feel from magnet-to-slot interactions) shows up as small periodic torque ripple that can translate into visible joint jitter at low speeds - it's usually mitigated with skewed magnets, better current control, or software compensation tables. A lot of the per-joint cost in a modern actuator isn't the motor - it's the combination of a precision gearbox, integrated encoders, torque sensing, and the driver electronics, all of which have to fit inside a housing the size of a fist.

Re: Why do so many humanoids use different actuator types for hips vs ankles?

Posted: Sat Nov 15, 2025 7:47 am
by choi98
@scott.novikova7 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. 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.

Re: Why do so many humanoids use different actuator types for hips vs ankles?

Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2025 12:59 am
by benjaminsanchez
@choi98 Just to be precise about one thing: 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. 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. This whole thread is a good reminder how young this field still is.

Re: Why do so many humanoids use different actuator types for hips vs ankles?

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2025 3:00 pm
by pierregreen
Slight correction, though the overall point stands: 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.

Re: Why do so many humanoids use different actuator types for hips vs ankles?

Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2025 4:27 pm
by barbara50
Just to be precise about one thing: 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: Why do so many humanoids use different actuator types for hips vs ankles?

Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2025 2:57 am
by emilyperez
@barbara50 Slight correction, though the overall point stands: 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. 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.