SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?

IMUs, force/torque sensors, depth cameras, LiDAR, tactile skin, SLAM, and state estimation.
chenperez
Posts: 202
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2024 3:51 pm

Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?

Post by chenperez »

This is a great summary, thanks. Estimating joint torque from motor current draw is cheap and requires no extra sensor, but it's less accurate than a dedicated torque sensor because it doesn't capture friction losses through the gearbox - good enough for coarse control, not always for precise force-controlled tasks. 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.
Building > buying.
scott21
Posts: 256
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:57 am

Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?

Post by scott21 »

@chenperez I'd take that specific number with a grain of salt, honestly. Estimating joint torque from motor current draw is cheap and requires no extra sensor, but it's less accurate than a dedicated torque sensor because it doesn't capture friction losses through the gearbox - good enough for coarse control, not always for precise force-controlled tasks. 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.
she/her
mia_lars
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2024 11:00 am

Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?

Post by mia_lars »

@scott21 I'd take that specific number with a grain of salt, honestly. Force/torque sensors near the ankle give a direct read on ground reaction forces, which is valuable for balance control, but they add cost, a failure point, and routing complexity right at a joint that already takes the most mechanical abuse. Event cameras (which report per-pixel brightness changes rather than full frames) are still more of a research curiosity than a production sensor for humanoids, mainly because the software ecosystem and processing pipelines around them are far less mature than for standard frame-based cameras.
Watching this space closely since 2019.
ethan17
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon May 19, 2025 8:21 pm

Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?

Post by ethan17 »

@mia_lars I can speak to this a bit. 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.
"Torque is a lifestyle."
zoeanderson
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2024 2:39 am

Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?

Post by zoeanderson »

Just to be precise about one thing: Depth sensing range and reliability both degrade outdoors in direct sunlight for most structured-light and active stereo cameras, since the ambient IR washes out the projected pattern - it's a real limitation for humanoids intended for anything beyond indoor, controlled environments.
young56
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2025 5:26 pm

Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?

Post by young56 »

@zoeanderson This raises a question for me - Estimating joint torque from motor current draw is cheap and requires no extra sensor, but it's less accurate than a dedicated torque sensor because it doesn't capture friction losses through the gearbox - good enough for coarse control, not always for precise force-controlled tasks.
she/her | grad student, biped locomotion
zoeanderson
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2024 2:39 am

Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?

Post by zoeanderson »

Slight correction, though the overall point stands: Force/torque sensors near the ankle give a direct read on ground reaction forces, which is valuable for balance control, but they add cost, a failure point, and routing complexity right at a joint that already takes the most mechanical abuse.
tariqlarsen
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2025 4:28 pm

Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?

Post by tariqlarsen »

@zoeanderson Counterpoint: Depth sensing range and reliability both degrade outdoors in direct sunlight for most structured-light and active stereo cameras, since the ambient IR washes out the projected pattern - it's a real limitation for humanoids intended for anything beyond indoor, controlled environments.
"Torque is a lifestyle."
young56
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2025 5:26 pm

Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?

Post by young56 »

This matches what I've seen too. Proprioception (the robot's sense of its own joint angles, velocities, and forces) tends to get less attention than flashy vision systems, even though a lot of balance and manipulation failures trace back to proprioceptive noise or miscalibration rather than a vision problem.
she/her | grad student, biped locomotion
ashley_flor
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri May 09, 2025 8:12 pm

Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?

Post by ashley_flor »

@young56 I can speak to this a bit. Vibration is one of the most underrated sources of noisy IMU and tactile readings - mounting matters as much as sensor quality, and a poorly isolated mount can add more noise than the sensor's own datasheet specs would suggest.
Post Reply