Page 3 of 3
Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?
Posted: Sun Aug 10, 2025 11:30 pm
by emilyperez
@ashley_flor Can I ask a dumb follow-up -
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. 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.
Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?
Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2025 10:11 am
by noah_pate
@emilyperez Appreciate the detailed answer.
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. 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.
Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?
Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2025 11:46 am
by yuki71
@noah_pate Counterpoint:
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.
Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?
Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2025 9:38 pm
by kim37
@yuki71 Slight correction, though the overall point stands:
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.
Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?
Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2025 9:07 am
by larrysokolov
Still learning the space, so correct me if wrong -
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.
Re: SLAM in dynamic warehouse environments - what's actually working in 2026?
Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2025 11:33 am
by olga_lind
Follow-up question though -
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.
Anyway, good thread - following for more.