11–20 of 122 posts
I'm getting ready to start a hobby project that involves scanning the interior surfaces of a house. Ideally the accuracy would be at least 1/16" (1.5mm), including any scan-stitching required because the sensor had to be moved around.
I've seen a few promising products, but none stands out as a perfect match.
I wonder how well this works if 20 such devices shine on the same object.
I wonder how well this works if 20 such devices shine on the same object.
That's sort of like asking how well cameras would work if 20 of them were looking at the same object. Lidar sensors can interfere with each other, and a certain industry-standard company is famous for having terrible problems with this issue, but there are engineering solutions to this problem. FMCW is a popular choice, and gives the benefit of providing instantaneous velocity readings. Of course, due to the Heisenbe…
I wonder how well this works if 20 such devices shine on the same object.
Anyone have a LIDAR (or similar) product suggestion? I'm getting ready to start a hobby project that involves scanning the interior surfaces of a house. Ideally the accuracy would be at least 1/16" (1.5mm), including any scan-stitching required because the sensor had to be moved around. I've seen a few promising products, but none stands out as a perfect match.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> like asking how well cameras would work if 20 of them were looking at the same object. > Lidar sensors can interfere with each other Then it's not really like 20 cameras looking at the same object. Mostly due to the fact that cameras are passive observers and not really emitting much. And if they do, it's light and it won't really affect the others because they all benefit from it (within reason). I'm reasonably ce…
Fair enough, I didn't really expand my comment enough to make my point and was about to delete it but now that someone replied I'll just leave it as is since I don't want to write a small essay. A good lidar sensor won't have issues with interference.
> The OS0 lidar sensor: an ultra-wide field of view sensor with 128 lines of resolution > The OS2 lidar sensor: a long-range sensor with up to 128 lines of resolution > Two new 32 channel sensors: both an OS0 and OS2 version > Price: Starts at $16,000 with volume discounts available I would LOVE to get my hands on this tech. Maybe in 5-10 years when the price comes down to commodity level for hackers to play around w…
While this is a ~80% discount on other 128 beam sensors, it's unfortunately still out of reach for the hacker community. We absolutely plan to get prices down to an affordable level for individuals in well under 5 years! Also, Ouster runs a sponsorship program that gives deeply discounted or free sensors to cool projects. If you have a cool idea, shoot me an email: derek.frome at ouster dot io
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fair enough, I didn't really expand my comment enough to make my point and was about to delete it but now that someone replied I'll just leave it as is since I don't want to write a small essay. A good lidar sensor won't have issues with interference.
Is it more or less a forgone conclusion that a good LiDAR sensor would not be affected by potentially hundreds of other similar or identical ones shining their beams across the same region?
Maybe I can add a little color to my original comment this way: most lidar sensors today, including some very expensive ones from supposedly reputable vendors, are not very good. In my experience, it is more often a manufacturing problem than a design problem (this varies more by company than it does by technology).