editor's blog
Subscribe Now

Locus of (Con)Fusion

At the MEPTEC MEMS conference a couple weeks ago, one sensor fusion question kept coming up over and over: Who’s in charge of sensor fusion?

On the one hand, IMU makers in general are giving away sensor fusion packages that help integrate the data from the individual sensors in their combo units. Then there are guys like Movea that don’t make sensors themselves, but integrate across a wide variety of sensors for both high- and low-level motion artifacts (motion in their case, but the concept extends to anything).

So who’s job is it?

I happened to have a conversation with Movea’s Dave Rothenberg that same day, and I brought the topic up.

His first comment was that what most IMU makers refer to as sensor fusion is simply the software required to establish orientation, which is a relatively low-level characteristic. He said that this correlated to Movea’s Foundation series, which they’ve actually de-emphasized a bit since it is hard to sell against free software, even if they do think they do a better job.

The sensor guys say they’re the right place to do it because they know their sensors better than anyone else. That actually covers two separate things: the physical characteristics of the sensors and how they operate, and the low-level data details – formats etc. Dave mentioned that it is work for them to adapt their software to different sensors, since they don’t all look or speak alike. (Area for future possible standardization? Future topic…) But they have to get it right in order for the other pieces that lay over it to work properly: errors at the bottom level will compound as further algorithms manipulate them.

(This also ties into the question of loose vs tight coupling, since a sensor maker is in a better position to do things tightly.)

Of course, it’s unlikely that the sensor vendors will want to take on the higher-level algorithms since those, almost by definition, will, at some point, involve sensors that they don’t make. So it looks like things may go the way of the embedded world, where critical low-level drivers and other bits of firmware are provided by (or in close partnership with) the processor maker, with other companies layering higher-value stuff on top. That seems to be how the sensor world is shaping up, which leaves room both for the sensor guys and for the third-party folks.

Leave a Reply

featured blogs
Apr 22, 2019
Last week, Cadence announced the certification of its LPDDR4 IP in TSMC's 16nm automotive process. The opening paragraph of the press release actually says: Cadence Design Systems, Inc today... [[ Click on the title to access the full blog on the Cadence Community site....
Apr 19, 2019
As platforms become more electrical, and the safety of flying becomes paramount, the FAA'€™s EWIS regulations serve as a cornerstone to modern aircraft wiring compliance and safety certification. EWIS (rhymes with '€œGee whiz'€) is both a concept and practice that embr...
Apr 18, 2019
Thermal Shock testing isn’t unique to the connector world, but it does play a big role in the qualification testing that Samtec puts all connectors through before they are released for production. Chances are likely that you thermally shock many items per day and don...
Jan 25, 2019
Let'€™s face it: We'€™re addicted to SRAM. It'€™s big, it'€™s power-hungry, but it'€™s fast. And no matter how much we complain about it, we still use it. Because we don'€™t have anything better in the mainstream yet. We'€™ve looked at attempts to improve conven...