Page 3 of 4
Re: What's the current best-in-class power density number you've actually verified?
Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2026 6:19 pm
by james15
I'd push back on this a bit.
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: What's the current best-in-class power density number you've actually verified?
Posted: Fri Apr 17, 2026 9:41 pm
by brian.campbell
To answer this directly:
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.
Re: What's the current best-in-class power density number you've actually verified?
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2026 11:11 am
by gimbalmar65
@brian.campbell Speaking from personal experience here,
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.
Re: What's the current best-in-class power density number you've actually verified?
Posted: Thu May 07, 2026 4:28 am
by young56
@gimbalmar65 Speaking from personal experience here,
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. 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.
Re: What's the current best-in-class power density number you've actually verified?
Posted: Sun May 10, 2026 1:56 pm
by harmonicjen60
Short answer:
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. 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.
Re: What's the current best-in-class power density number you've actually verified?
Posted: Thu May 14, 2026 7:59 am
by ethan_fisc
Agreed, and I'd add:
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. 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.
Re: What's the current best-in-class power density number you've actually verified?
Posted: Sun May 17, 2026 7:21 pm
by gimbalmar65
This is a great summary, thanks.
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. 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.
Re: What's the current best-in-class power density number you've actually verified?
Posted: Sat May 23, 2026 3:32 pm
by sarah.santos3
From hands-on experience,
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. 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.
Re: What's the current best-in-class power density number you've actually verified?
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2026 2:26 am
by james15
Tangent, but worth mentioning:
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.
Re: What's the current best-in-class power density number you've actually verified?
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2026 5:41 am
by scott21
Related question -
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. 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.