Page 2 of 2
Re: Encoder vs IMU-based joint angle estimation - which do you trust more?
Posted: Fri Jan 30, 2026 12:34 pm
by mohammed.rossi
Agreed, and I'd add:
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: Encoder vs IMU-based joint angle estimation - which do you trust more?
Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2026 3:19 am
by ssantos
I'd frame this differently.
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: Encoder vs IMU-based joint angle estimation - which do you trust more?
Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2026 8:49 pm
by rossi30
@ssantos Minor factual note:
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: Encoder vs IMU-based joint angle estimation - which do you trust more?
Posted: Sat Feb 14, 2026 6:48 am
by nicole10
Small correction on one detail:
Tactile skin arrays have improved a lot, but 'good enough to matter' really depends on the task - coarse contact detection across a large area is fairly mature, while fine, high-resolution force distribution sensing (like a human fingertip) is still the harder problem.