Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?

Harmonic drives, quasi-direct drive, series elastic actuators, motor selection, gearing, and everything that makes joints move.
sarah.santos3
Posts: 213
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2025 5:30 am

Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?

Post by sarah.santos3 »

@ethan_fisc Just to be precise about one thing: 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.
they/them
benjaminsanchez
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2025 1:58 am

Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?

Post by benjaminsanchez »

@sarah.santos3 Agreed, and I'd add: 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. Kind of makes me think about how different this all looked even three years ago.
karen.chen3
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2025 1:30 pm

Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?

Post by karen.chen3 »

Respectfully, I think this undersells it a bit. Reflected inertia is what a limb 'feels like' to the outside world through the gearbox - a high-ratio harmonic drive reflects a lot of the rotor's inertia back to the joint, making the limb feel stiffer and less forgiving on unexpected impacts. Encoder resolution requirements scale with how tightly you need to control low-speed motion - coarse encoders are fine for open-loop swing phases but cause visible stutter during precise placement or fine force control.
they/them
scott21
Posts: 256
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:57 am

Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?

Post by scott21 »

Thanks for laying this out, genuinely useful. Boston Dynamics' commercial electric Atlas switched fully from hydraulic to QDD-style electric actuation, ending up quieter and lighter with comparable or better dynamic performance than the old hydraulic platform.
she/her
servoken70
Posts: 179
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2024 5:05 am

Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?

Post by servoken70 »

@scott21 To answer this directly: 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. Reminds me a bit of the early drone hobbyist scene, honestly.
Watching this space closely since 2019.
johnrossi
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2025 2:39 am

Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?

Post by johnrossi »

Can I ask a dumb follow-up - 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. 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.
she/her
park44
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2024 12:03 am

Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?

Post by park44 »

From hands-on experience, 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. 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.
she/her
olga_lind
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2024 12:11 pm

Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?

Post by olga_lind »

Ran into exactly this myself. 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.
jhansen
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2024 8:27 am

Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?

Post by jhansen »

Same conclusion I've come to. Also worth noting: 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. 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. Reminds me a bit of the early drone hobbyist scene, honestly.
sarah.santos3
Posts: 213
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2025 5:30 am

Re: Best practices for actuator bench testing before installing in a full robot?

Post by sarah.santos3 »

@jhansen +1 to this. Worth adding: 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.
they/them
Post Reply