Anyone tracking sensor cost trends the way we track actuator cost trends?
-
freya.smith
- Posts: 72
- Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2026 5:28 pm
Re: Anyone tracking sensor cost trends the way we track actuator cost trends?
Thanks for laying this out, genuinely useful.
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.
Reminds me a bit of the early drone hobbyist scene, honestly.
she/her
-
forgesve15
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2026 4:32 am
Re: Anyone tracking sensor cost trends the way we track actuator cost trends?
Sorry if this is a basic question, but
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.
-
william.moreau6
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2026 12:47 pm
Re: Anyone tracking sensor cost trends the way we track actuator cost trends?
@forgesve15 Agreed, and I'd add:
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. 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.
Re: Anyone tracking sensor cost trends the way we track actuator cost trends?
@william.moreau6 I dealt with almost this exact situation.
IMU drift over time (bias instability) is usually the real culprit behind slowly diverging state estimates, not noise - it's typically handled with sensor fusion against other references (visual odometry, joint kinematics) rather than trying to eliminate drift at the source.
Re: Anyone tracking sensor cost trends the way we track actuator cost trends?
@jwang Agreed, and I'd add:
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.
Ex-automotive, now full-time robots.
-
mary.taylor6
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2025 10:51 pm
Re: Anyone tracking sensor cost trends the way we track actuator cost trends?
@jlefebvre Slightly off-topic, but related:
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.
-
servobre20
- Posts: 58
- Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2026 6:16 am
Re: Anyone tracking sensor cost trends the way we track actuator cost trends?
This matches something I went through recently.
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. 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.
Ex-automotive, now full-time robots.
-
amandawhite
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Wed May 13, 2026 1:15 pm
Re: Anyone tracking sensor cost trends the way we track actuator cost trends?
@servobre20 Worth being a little skeptical of the marketing angle here.
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. 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.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."
-
servosan90
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2026 7:41 am
Re: Anyone tracking sensor cost trends the way we track actuator cost trends?
@amandawhite Here's what I know on this:
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.
he/him
-
thomasmitchell
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2026 6:08 am
Re: Anyone tracking sensor cost trends the way we track actuator cost trends?
Small correction on one detail:
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.
Reminds me a bit of the early drone hobbyist scene, honestly.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."