Page 1 of 3
How much weight do wiring and connectors actually add per joint?
Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2026 6:15 pm
by barbara.jones
Trying to organize my own thinking on this, so bear with me.
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. It's common for a single humanoid to mix actuator types by joint - harmonic drives or hybrid geared actuators at the hips and shoulders where sustained torque matters most, and lower-ratio QDD-style actuators at ankles and knees where backdrivability and impact tolerance matter more. 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.
Interested in both agreement and pushback here.
Re: How much weight do wiring and connectors actually add per joint?
Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2026 7:12 pm
by forgesve15
Here's the relevant bit as far as I understand it:
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. 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: How much weight do wiring and connectors actually add per joint?
Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2026 10:50 pm
by joseph31
That's the official framing, at least - reality tends to lag a bit.
For dynamic walking and recovery, joint control bandwidth in the tens of Hz range is typically necessary to react to a stumble before the center of mass gets too far outside the support polygon.
Re: How much weight do wiring and connectors actually add per joint?
Posted: Sat Aug 08, 2026 2:28 am
by sarah.santos3
This matches something I went through recently.
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.
This whole thread is a good reminder how young this field still is.
Re: How much weight do wiring and connectors actually add per joint?
Posted: Sat Aug 08, 2026 4:06 am
by hill23
@sarah.santos3 This is exactly the kind of context I was looking for.
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: How much weight do wiring and connectors actually add per joint?
Posted: Mon Aug 10, 2026 10:15 am
by sven.wilson4
@hill23 To answer this directly:
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.
Kind of makes me think about how different this all looked even three years ago.
Re: How much weight do wiring and connectors actually add per joint?
Posted: Tue Aug 11, 2026 7:55 pm
by carlossanchez
I'd frame this differently.
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: How much weight do wiring and connectors actually add per joint?
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2026 11:37 am
by kwilliams
I see it a little differently.
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. 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.
Re: How much weight do wiring and connectors actually add per joint?
Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2026 1:10 pm
by charlesbianchi
I'd push back on this a bit.
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.
Re: How much weight do wiring and connectors actually add per joint?
Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2026 3:33 pm
by chloe_jack
This is exactly the kind of context I was looking for.
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.