Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Short Introduction to Automotive Lidar Technology

viksnewsletter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 187 posts

Re: A Short Introduction to Automotive Lidar Technology

#171

Post by threeseed »

stormfather wrote: post #138
sroussey wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Optimus should probably have LiDAR more than a car…

I would guess the plan is to have the foundational machine vision tech that becomes the core of robotics sensors. Not just Optimus but every robot arm in a factory, robot mule, etc. I don't think everything will have LIDAR if its proven to be unnecessary.

The foundational tech Tesla is using is the same as everyone.

We know this because there have been public presentations about it.

And inventing groundbreaking new tech is so far the domain of academia and large, well funded R&D labs. And almost always shared.

Re: A Short Introduction to Automotive Lidar Technology

#172

Post by willy_k »

edm0nd wrote: post #77
jaimex2 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Musk has said several times Lidar is great. It's just a stupid idea for automotive use and he's not wrong. There's nothing similar in nature for a reason.

Bats kinda have Lidar.

Wouldn’t it be sonar?

Re: A Short Introduction to Automotive Lidar Technology

#173

Post by mrguyorama »

xnx wrote: post #88
UltraSane wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not having a motor and thus having to depend on people to close doors on an autonomous car seems very silly.

Waymo's custom designed 6th generation vehicles[1] with self-closing doors were expected to enter service this year, but have [probably] been put on indefinite hold due to tariff issues [1] https://waymo.com/blog/2021/12/expanding-our-waymo-one-fleet...

Minivans have had powered doors for decades and make great taxis, why do they need a special vehicle for this?

Re: A Short Introduction to Automotive Lidar Technology

#174

Post by Klaus23 »

quonn wrote: post #117
Klaus23 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is simply not true. Let's look at the best autonomous driving features available today, i.e. level 3: Mercedes Drive Pilot: Uses a lidar (and a dummy unit) up front. BMW Personal Pilot: Uses a lidar (and a dummy unit) up front Honda SENSING Elite: Uses 5! lidars They all use lidar, and some of the placement locations are downright hideous (Mercedes EQS). I think further development will require even more/better…

Maybe they changed their mind on it in the last 10 years. I had as the source a high-ranking BMW manager as well as an Audi one who each gave a public lecture at a university with such a statement.

After a bit of research, I found out that they apparently did. Obviously every manufacturer would like to be able to use only proven technologies such as cameras and radar because they are cheap. One of the early Mercedes prototypes seemingly didn't have lidar https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlgGTi4Gs50&t=79>.

Since then, the consensus has been that without lidar, the systems would not meet safety standards. For example, the cars need to be able to detect fairly flat objects, such as pallets that have fallen onto the road, which are very difficult to see optically, especially in difficult lighting conditions. For this reason, and because the technology has come down in price, virtually everyone except Tesla, which is developing advanced driving systems, is using lidar.

This development is nearly a decade old. It is for this reason, combined with the overwhelming amount of Musk-related nonsense, that I objected so strongly.

Re: A Short Introduction to Automotive Lidar Technology

#175

Post by xnx »

mrguyorama wrote: post #173
xnx wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waymo's custom designed 6th generation vehicles[1] with self-closing doors were expected to enter service this year, but have [probably] been put on indefinite hold due to tariff issues [1] https://waymo.com/blog/2021/12/expanding-our-waymo-one-fleet...

Minivans have had powered doors for decades and make great taxis, why do they need a special vehicle for this?

An earlier version of Waymo's vehicle was based on the Chrysler Pacifica. Like in a lot of areas, if you're going to spend billions of dollars to buy thousands of some product, it is worth customizing it for the specific purpose.

Re: A Short Introduction to Automotive Lidar Technology

#176

Post by hardenedmetapod »

brcmthrowaway wrote: post #40

Is there a lidar unit I can take home and scan my house at high resolution (than iphone)?

I wouldn't say high resolution, but you can get away with some scans with Android.

There are options but the devices are limited (and the applications too)

Samsung S20 series are the last to have it (And I think the Plus is the best one for it)

Going a little older the Note 10 Plus as well (also an awesome phone)

Of the same vintage there are some other devices. You have to look at the ARCore device list and Ctrl F for "ToF" https://developers.google.com/ar/devices

As for applications that can take advantage of the ARCore depth mapping there's RTAB-Map and 3D Live Scanner

https://github.com/introlab/rtabmap/releases/tag/0.21.4 (You'd want the android30 build)

https://github.com/lvonasek/3DLiveScanner/releases/tag/v2022

RTAB-Map is more fleshed out, but has a bit of a learning curve. By far my preferred way of capturing a scan. Be sure to set the values up a little as the defaults are fairly reserved.

3DLiveScanner is more a shoot and done. You capture and it exports all in one with minimal settings to tweak. This was my go to forever before realizing RTAB-Map had builds that worked. It's very capabale for that it is and can get some really good scans setting the res to 2 or 1 cm.

Sample from the S20 Plus https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/polygonal-printer-f2855acc08...

https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/truck-in-the-bush-c2f9c1842e...

https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/3doggo-and-a-catscan-79f1f12...

Note 10 Plus was a big rougher but I don't know if I had found the size setting at that point https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/house-dd80af1455c74874951953...

As far as I'm aware there's nothing on the Android side slated to contain a ToF depth sensor.

Note: If you have a decent Android at the moment, ARCore by itself with dual cameras does surprisingly well for what it is.

Both of those applications will still do live on device scanning with only RGB cameras. 3DLiveScanner will just work if you want to try it.

RTAB-Map you have to go to Settings > Mapping > check Depth from Motion and then on the main screen very first item make sure ARCore NDK is set as the driver (See note above about tweaking the capture settings). The live scan will look a bit rough but if you capture as much detail as you can and let it process, results turn out much better after the processing.

Re: A Short Introduction to Automotive Lidar Technology

#177

Post by jaimex2 »

adamweld wrote: post #167
jaimex2 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it only works in extremely controlled environments driving really slowly. The design is also flawed as it has to work with cameras anyway. The last thing you want is two systems arguing over what they see.

Nice, you just outed yourself as being completely clueless. There exist many good sensor fusion techniques for summing the output of disagreeing sensors.

Sounds like bad designs. If you can get rid of something to reduce complexity you absolutely should.

Re: A Short Introduction to Automotive Lidar Technology

#178

Post by dilyevsky »

Animats wrote: post #8

That's a reasonable basic overview. I'm surprised that rotating scanners are still used. It's been twenty years since Velodyne built their first one. They work OK, but cost too much. I was expecting flash LIDAR or MEMS mirrors to take over. Continental, the auto parts company, bought the leading flash LIDAR company over a decade ago, but the volume market a big parts company needs never appeared. Waymo is still using…

I doubt MEMS will work on a moving vehicle. Luminar makes solid-state lidars that are used on EX90 Volvos. I suspect either their resolution or their FOV (120°) is not enough for proper self-driving.

Re: A Short Introduction to Automotive Lidar Technology

#179

Post by bigstrat2003 »

Klaus23 wrote: post #147
tordrt wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of these are far less capable than FSD. They might have more advanced regulatory approval because they have strong limitations of when it can be used, but if you drive the same route and compare, its not even close.

I doubt it. Yes, FSD is more flexible and can also drive reasonably well on city streets, but there is a reason why it is not certified for level 3 on motorways. It would most likely fail certification. With a level 3 system, I can take my eyes off the road and watch a movie. Doing that with FSD, even in the best conditions, is suicidal. Level 3 vehicles must have an extremely low failure rate. Any crash would quickl…

> With a level 3 system, I can take my eyes off the road and watch a movie. Doing that with FSD, even in the best conditions, is suicidal.

That is hyperbole at best. I've test driven a Tesla with FSD and it worked flawlessly, such that I would have been perfectly safe taking my eyes off the road. Of course one test drive is not sufficient data to say one should trust the system all the time, but you are making the claim that it is never trustworthy which isn't true.

Re: A Short Introduction to Automotive Lidar Technology

#180

Post by bigstrat2003 »

fragmede wrote: post #29
tgaj wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Theoretically if a human can drive a car using a pair of eyes connected to brain, it should be possible to do that using two cameras connected to some kind of image processing unit.

If we want the sell driving computer to be only possibly as good as a human. I can't see in the dark, can't see through fog, and have trouble with rain. Why is human visibility the bar to meet here?

Because we allow humans to drive, therefore if something can perform as well as a human it should be allowed. The bar is a floor, not a ceiling.
Post reply on HN