Top
Best
New

Posted by mhb 4 days ago

Sub-$200 Lidar could reshuffle auto sensor economics(spectrum.ieee.org)
372 points | 509 commentspage 2
orliesaurus 16 hours ago|
Interesting to see the cost curve drop ... this always changes the market.

I have been watching the sensor space for a while. Cheap LIDAR units could open up weird DIY uses and not just cars. ALSO regulatory and mapping integration will matter. I tried to work with public datasets and it's messy. The hardware is only one part! BUT it's exciting to see multiple vendors in the space. Competition might push vendors to refine the software stack as well as the hardware. HOWEVER I'm keeping an eye on how these systems handle edge cases in bad weather. I don't think we have seen enough data yet...

michaelt 15 hours ago||
> Cheap LIDAR units could open up weird DIY uses and not just cars.

Interestingly, there are already some comparatively cheap LIDAR units on the market.

In the automotive market, ideally you need a 200m+ range (or whatever the stopping distance of your vehicle is) and you need to operate in bright direct sunlight (good luck making an eye-safe laser that doesn't get washed out by the sun) and you need more than one scanning plane (for when the car goes over bumps).

On the other hand, for indoor robotics where a 10m range is enough and there's much less direct sunlight? Your local robotics stockist probably already has something <$400

generuso 13 hours ago|||
Neato from San Diego has developed a $30 (indoor, parallax based) LIDAR about 20 years ago, for their vacuum cleaners [1].

Later, improved units based on the same principle became ubiquitous in Chinese robot vacuums [2]. Such LIDARs, and similarly looking more conventional time-of-flight units are sold for anywhere between $20-$200, depending on the details of the design.

[1] https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22A+Low-Cost+Laser+Dis... [2] https://github.com/kaiaai/awesome-2d-lidars/blob/main/README...

IanCal 14 hours ago|||
Sounds like the quality isn't all that great but LD06 sensors look like they're about $20 and someone who works on libraries about this suggested the STL27L which seems to be about $160 and here's an outdoor scan from it: https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/pidar-scan-240901-0647-7997b...

Not sure if the ld06 is a scanner like this or if it's just a line (like you'd use for a cheaper robot vac).

science_casual 14 hours ago||
[dead]
epolanski 15 hours ago||
Microvision has been saying that from half a decade, products? Nowhere to be found.
niceguy1827 4 hours ago||
So tiring to keep hearing this argument "humans only use vision to drive, so why would self driving cars need more?"

This argument is inherently anti-progress. It's like saying human had been using sextants to navigate for hundreds of years, why GPS?

A more sensible question is, why not?

newman314 3 hours ago||
I wonder if Comma.ai will ever be open to incorporating this into openpilot.

I always thought the argument that humans are adequate drivers and hence only cameras was not great. Why not actually be better than humans at sensing and driving?

BenoitP 16 hours ago||
> laser pulses

> phased-array

I'm not well versed into RF physics. I had the feeling that light-wave coherency in lasers had to be created at a single source (or amplified as it passes by). That's the first time I hear about phased-array lasers.

Can someone knowledgeable chime in on this?

MayeulC 15 hours ago||
The beam is split and re-emitted in multiple points. By controlling the optical length (refractive index, or just the length of the waveguide by using optical junctions) of the path that leads to each emitter, the phase can be adjusted.

In practice, this can be done with phase change materials (heat/cool materials to change their index), or micro ring resonators (to divert light from one wave guide to another).

The beam then self-interferes, and the resulting interference pattern (constructive/destructive depending on the direction) are used to modulate the beam orientation.

You are right that a single source is needed, though I imagine that you can also use a laser source and shine it at another "pumped" material to have it emit more coherent light.

I've been thinking about possible use-cases for this technology besides LIDAR,. Point to point laser communication could be an interesting application: satellite-to-satellite communication, or drone-to-drone in high-EMI settings (battlefield with jammers). This would make mounting laser designators on small drones a lot easier. Here you go, free startup ideas ;)

rich_sasha 15 hours ago|||
In principle, as the sibling comment says, you could measure just the phase difference on the receiver end. The trick is that it's much harder for light frequencies than radar. I'm non even sure we can measure the phase etc of a light beam, and if we could, the Nyquist frequency is incredibly high - 2x frequency takes us to PHz frequencies.

There might be something cute you can do with interference patterns but no idea about that. We do sort of similar things with astronomic observations.

iceyest 15 hours ago|||
A phased array is an antenna composed of multiple smaller antennas within the same plane that can constructively/destructively aim its radio beam within any direction it is facing. I'm no radio engineer but I think it works via an interference pattern being strongest in the direction you want the beam aimed. This is mostly used in radar arrays though I suppose it could work with light too since it is also a wave.
bavell 12 hours ago|||
I think about it like a series of waves in a pool. One end has wave generators (the lasers) spaced appropriately such that resulting waves hitting the other end interfere just right and create a unified wavefront (same phase, amplitude, frequency).

NB: just my layman's understanding

ptero 15 hours ago||
Not an expert, but main challenges with laser coherency are present when shaping the output using multiple transmitters.

For lidar you transmit a pulse from a single source and receive its reflection at multiple points. Mentioning phased array with lidar almost always means receiving.

bilsbie 11 hours ago||
Are we sure these things aren’t damaging our eyes? It’s lasers shooting all over the place right?
btreecat 11 hours ago||
When designed, built, installed and calibrated correctly, the power and wavelengths used are not considered harmful to humans.
pinko 9 hours ago|||
What are the chances some non-trivial proportion of the millions of cars on the road will not have their LIDAR designed, built, installed or calibrated correctly? I suspect this is going to be a recognized public health issue in a decade or two. (It will likely be an issue well before that, but unrecognized...)
topspin 7 hours ago|||
There is an incentive to use higher power. Push the edge of safety limits to achieve higher performance from lower cost devices, for example.

It occurs to me there is an opportunity here. Passive lidar detectors sampling fleets of vehicles in the real world, measuring compliance and detecting outliers, would be interesting. A well placed, stationary device could sample thousands of vehicles every day. Patterns will emerge among manufacturers. Failure modes will be seen.

Cursory queries on this reveal nothing. Apparently, no one is doing this. We're all relying on front end certification and compliance. No thought given to the real world of design flaws, damage, faulty repairs, unanticipated failure modes, etc.

Apparently there are lidar jammers. I bet those are rigorously compliant with Class 1 safety regs... No one manufacturing those is ever going to think; "hey, why not a 50W pulse train?"

btreecat 4 hours ago||||
For everyone of those safety measures to be intentionally bypassed or ignored, the numbers are assuredly non-zero.

But is it going to raise to a level of concern? I don't think we're going to see a ton of cars with blinding lasers installed, unless they are installed to intentionally blind people.

If you have used face I'd, or someone has used a face detection on modern smart phone on you, or if you've pulled up to a modern intersection, you've been blasted with lasers. It may come one day where that's the largest concern but today it's not my primary problem and investing in FUD isn't going to bring any benefits.

MetaWhirledPeas 9 hours ago|||
There's going to be an expanding market for laser-proof sunglasses.
MetaWhirledPeas 9 hours ago|||
That's a lot of qualifiers. And replace "humans" with "cameras" and I'm reminded that despite their well-intentioned efforts Volvo has failed there already.
btreecat 4 hours ago||
It really isn't though. It's how you do something correctly. Drill into the details of just about any system and you'll see there's a lot of assumptions based on the layers above and below.

A good safety system requires multiple of these failures to occur together to become unacceptable in risk.

This is why we create regulations and inspectors.

MetaWhirledPeas 9 hours ago||
I get pretty ticked when people shine laser lights in my direction regardless of their intensity, so I'm not too thrilled about the idea of invisible lasers hitting me square in the pupil without my knowledge.
keyKeeper 14 hours ago||
There are laser measurers sold for a few buck on Temu. Robot vacuums sold for few hundred dollars have Lidars that map out the room in a seconds.

Is there any actual technical reason why automobile Lidar be expensive? Just combine visual processing with single point sampler that will feed points of interest and accurate model of the surroundings will be built.

numpad0 12 hours ago||
Most spinning robovac LIDARs are 2D. Most solid state robovac LIDARs are like 8x8 array of laser pointers.

Automotive LIDARs are like, 128x64[px] for production models or 1920x1080[px] for experimental models with GbE and/or HDMI-equivalents-of-industry outputs. Totally different technologies.

echoangle 13 hours ago|||
Probably one factor is range. The article talks about 200-300m range, a robot vacuum has maybe 10m best case?
keyKeeper 13 hours ago||
For example this one has 120m range with 1cm accuracy and its 15 euros: https://www.temu.com/bg-en/-digital-laser-distance-meter-50m...
echoangle 1 hour ago|||
Outside in the sun against other cars or inside against a wall?
waldarbeiter 12 hours ago|||
Is the 1 cm spec 1σ (or less) or worst-case? It’s a safety-critical application.
qznc 14 hours ago|||
I know that automotive parts of the standard requirement to withstand 80°C (or 120°C for military use). A robot vacuum working in a living room can probably be made cheaper because it does not have to face as harsh environments?

Also, range is probably a factor. In a living room, you probably need something like 20m max. You car should "see" farther.

keyKeeper 13 hours ago|||
Sure, these are the assumptions but silicon is silicon, copper is copper and solder is solder. They don't use easy melting electronics in vacuums and hardened stuff in cars, the tech is about the same unless it is supposed to work in highly radioactive environment. The plastics are different but car interiors are full of plastics, so its unlikely that the costs of temperature resistant plastics needed for this is more than a cupholder.

As for the range, again pretty powerful lasers are sold for sub 10SUD prices on retail. I am sure that there must be higher calibration and precision requirements as the distance increase but is it really order of magnitudes higher? 120 meters laser measurer with 1cm accuracy is 15 Euros on Temu and that thing has an LCD screen and a battery as a handheld device. How much distance do you actually need?

foepys 14 hours ago|||
Not only that but vibrations play a big part as well, especially on ICE vehicles.
keyKeeper 13 hours ago|||
Vibrations are surely an issue with electromechanical systems but hardly with electronics. There are plenty of cheap electronic accessories for cars and you can observe that those keep functioning for years.
whatsupdog 13 hours ago|||
Please keep politics out of it.
GRiMe2D 13 hours ago||
ICE = internal combustion engine
0_____0 4 hours ago|||
Oh my god so many reasons. I don't feel like getting fully into it but that's kind of like asking why you can't use your kitchen scale to measure highway traffic as it drives over it.
xavortm 13 hours ago||
to add to the rest of the comments, a reliability standard also adds on cost. The scale is different, but compare a car bolt vs manned space mission craft's bolt.
jdhendrickson 16 hours ago||
@dang .... do these comments seem organic to you? old accounts with almost zero karma going out of their way to use the same verbiage to compliment waymo 18 minutes after an article gets posted? .... dead internet at work.
tomhow 15 hours ago||
Please don't post like this. If you suspect something, please email us (hn@ycombinator.com) with links to specific comments. The guidelines are clear abut this:

Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.

small_model 15 hours ago||
Anytime a Tesla or Elon related article is posted it gets a barrage of negative comments usually FUD like. Any neutral or positive comment gets downvoted heavily. Bit suspicious to say the least, very clear pattern, they are not doing it very well should be a bit more nuanced.
tomhow 15 hours ago|||
There is no evidence of any such organised campaign. The critical comments we see against that company and person are generally from known, established HN users, and align with frequently-expressed sentiments among the general public. And the complaint is just as often made that "anything remotely critical" about that company and person is flagged. If posts about the topic are being downvoted and flagged, it's mostly because that person and company are in the news so frequently that most commentary about them is repetitive, sensationalist and uninteresting, and thus off topic for HN.
Barbing 14 hours ago||
What a great website. Thanks for the data! And good work
notTooFarGone 15 hours ago||||
Or everyone is just tired of tesla and their stubborn camera only tech that will fail in higher autonomy cases?

No no it's the cabal...

ant6n 15 hours ago|||
Could be lurkers triggered
torginus 8 hours ago||
From the article:

> pricing below US $200. That’s less than half of typical prices now, and it’s not even the full extent of the company’s ambition.

This means there are sensors available for like $500 or more. At 4 per car, this is still just $2000, which is a very reasonable cost add even for a midrange car.

And with price comparisons like this, I'm sure Chinese competitors aren't factored in, I'm sure the Chinese have stuff for cheaper.

So Affordable Lidar is not a limitation. Despite that, self-driving doesn't really exist outside of Waymo, which people take to assume that Lidar is their killer advantage, but with other cars having Lidar, I think that might not turn out to be the deciding facotr.

bastawhiz 7 hours ago|
I'm not sure anyone today really thinks self driving hinges on the hardware. Comma does a surprisingly good job with very minimal hardware (in the form factor of an old Tom Tom!). The advantage is really the device's processing power (cramming enough compute in without making it crazy expensive) and the data that the manufacturer has about the environment and training data to handle edge cases. You can't just buy those things, because the people that have them would be your competitors.
JackFr 11 hours ago|
When every car has LIDAR will they all begin to blind each other?

(Insert old man rant “Why are everyone’s headlights so gosh darn bright these days?!”)

TulliusCicero 1 hour ago||
There's already cases in SF where a bunch of Waymos are right next to each other, driving around.
slicktux 11 hours ago|||
That might very well be the case…I’m sure the IR beams are encoded uniquely per LIDAR but it might still blind them… good food for thought!
Maxious 11 hours ago||
pew pew https://www.techspot.com/news/108045-lidar-great-cars-but-ca...
More comments...