Page 6 of 6

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2025 6:45 pm
by wei_ross
Slightly off-topic, but related: 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. This whole thread is a good reminder how young this field still is.

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2025 5:18 am
by sarah.santos3
@wei_ross Appreciate the detailed answer. 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. 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.

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2025 9:48 pm
by nancy_lewi
One nitpick - 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.

Re: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2025 1:20 am
by williams84
One nitpick - 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: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2025 12:40 am
by carlossanchez
I'd push back on this a bit. 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. 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: What sensor placement mistake have you seen repeated across multiple designs?

Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2025 3:15 pm
by scott.andersson5
I dealt with almost this exact situation. 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.