3 ms·
There are other ways to get even greater accuracy than an applanix. But they require pre-indexing the surroundings and using a lidar to position yourself within
by uuilly 15y ago
There are other ways to get even greater accuracy than an applanix. But they require pre-indexing the surroundings and using a lidar to position yourself within the "virtual" world.
- georgecmu 15y agoThis would require lidar error to be less than 1cm. If you know a sensor like that, I would appreciate a link.
- uuilly 15y agoThe riegl for sure. Others have made the velodyne work.
- georgecmu 15y agoHaven't worked with Riegl, but I can tell you that Velodyne isn't even close. Even their official datasheets state range error of 5 cm; reality is much worse.
- makmanalp 15y agoYou probably do some sort of filtering on the raw input, maybe some sort of landmark based SLAM.
- uuilly 15y agoThe factory calibration on the 64 diodes of the velodyne is bad. It needs to be fixed. There is a paper out of Stanford that tells you how to fix it. I can't think of the name off the top of my head but if you email me I can dig it up. Also the error grows with distance. So if your bot is navigating off of objects 200 meters away, yeah you'll be more off. But you can use points closer to it and you'll get better results. Look around and you'll see that the velodyne has been made to work. Nobody loves it though. The riegl has very low beam divergence, is beautiful, survey accurate, not waterproof and $300k+. Don't forget the workhorse SICK scanners. They are cheap and have their pros and cons.