Barometric altimeters for stair detection - gimmick or genuinely useful?

IMUs, force/torque sensors, depth cameras, LiDAR, tactile skin, SLAM, and state estimation.
rao91
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2025 1:55 am

Re: Barometric altimeters for stair detection - gimmick or genuinely useful?

Post by rao91 »

@kwilliams Tangent, but worth mentioning: 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. A minimum viable sensing suite for safe bipedal walking generally includes joint encoders, an IMU for orientation/angular velocity, and either force/torque sensing or accurate current-based torque estimation at the ankles - everything else (vision, tactile, LiDAR) adds capability rather than being strictly required just to stay upright.
he/him
wei_ross
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2025 2:40 am

Re: Barometric altimeters for stair detection - gimmick or genuinely useful?

Post by wei_ross »

@rao91 I don't think that's quite right, for what it's worth. Multi-camera calibration drifts over time from thermal expansion, vibration, and mechanical wear, which is why production systems typically run periodic recalibration routines rather than assuming a one-time factory calibration holds forever. SLAM in a working warehouse is harder than in a controlled lab mainly because the map keeps changing - pallets move, people walk through, lighting shifts near dock doors - so a lot of production systems lean on semi-static maps refreshed periodically rather than pure continuous SLAM.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."
scott21
Posts: 256
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2024 9:57 am

Re: Barometric altimeters for stair detection - gimmick or genuinely useful?

Post by scott21 »

@wei_ross Just to be precise about one thing: 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. SLAM in a working warehouse is harder than in a controlled lab mainly because the map keeps changing - pallets move, people walk through, lighting shifts near dock doors - so a lot of production systems lean on semi-static maps refreshed periodically rather than pure continuous SLAM.
she/her
mia.novak
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2026 12:28 am

Re: Barometric altimeters for stair detection - gimmick or genuinely useful?

Post by mia.novak »

@scott21 Speaking from personal experience here, LiDAR gives reliable, lighting-independent range data but is heavier, pricier, and gives sparser point clouds up close than stereo or depth cameras, which is why a lot of humanoids lean on stereo/depth cameras for near-field manipulation and reserve LiDAR (if present at all) for longer-range navigation.
Watching this space closely since 2019.
scott.andersson5
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2024 8:39 pm

Re: Barometric altimeters for stair detection - gimmick or genuinely useful?

Post by scott.andersson5 »

@mia.novak I'd push back on this a bit. A minimum viable sensing suite for safe bipedal walking generally includes joint encoders, an IMU for orientation/angular velocity, and either force/torque sensing or accurate current-based torque estimation at the ankles - everything else (vision, tactile, LiDAR) adds capability rather than being strictly required just to stay upright. Totally unrelated but has anyone else noticed how fast component costs are dropping this year.
larrysokolov
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2025 4:23 pm

Re: Barometric altimeters for stair detection - gimmick or genuinely useful?

Post by larrysokolov »

@scott.andersson5 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.
he/him
noah_pate
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2024 8:25 pm

Re: Barometric altimeters for stair detection - gimmick or genuinely useful?

Post by noah_pate »

@larrysokolov This lines up with my experience. 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. 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.
aliu
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2026 6:16 am

Re: Barometric altimeters for stair detection - gimmick or genuinely useful?

Post by aliu »

@noah_pate Counterpoint: A minimum viable sensing suite for safe bipedal walking generally includes joint encoders, an IMU for orientation/angular velocity, and either force/torque sensing or accurate current-based torque estimation at the ankles - everything else (vision, tactile, LiDAR) adds capability rather than being strictly required just to stay upright.
she/her
Post Reply