Why is autoparking using photosensors still a challenge for OEMs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Moehamed
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the challenges of developing an autoparking system using photosensors, specifically light-dependent resistors (LDRs). Participants explore the complexities involved in creating such a control system, touching on the technical requirements and the limitations faced by original equipment manufacturers (OEMs).

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks information on building a control system for autoparking using photosensors.
  • Another participant emphasizes that developing an autoparking system is complex and requires multiple sensors, sophisticated coding, and precise control of vehicle dynamics.
  • Concerns are raised about the feasibility of simply using a photosensor for autoparking, highlighting the need for a comprehensive control system rather than a basic circuit.
  • A later reply acknowledges the initial response's rudeness but reiterates the significant investment and effort OEMs have made in developing effective autoparking systems.
  • It is noted that despite substantial resources, OEMs still struggle to achieve reliable autoparking solutions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the complexity of creating an effective autoparking system and the limitations of using photosensors alone. However, there is no consensus on the specifics of how to approach the development of such a system.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the need for strategic sensor placement and advanced control logic, indicating that the discussion is limited by the assumptions about the capabilities of photosensors and the overall design of the control system.

Moehamed
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
hey .. i want to make a control on a car using photo sensors ( LDR ) for an autoparking system would you kindly give me any info about the circuit i have to use to build up this system .. thanks in advance
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF, Moehamed.
You should never say "Thanks in advance". That indicates that you expect a favourable response, which just pisses people off. If someone says "thanks in advance" to me in person, my response is "you're welcome in advance; now go jump yourself."
That being out of the way, what exactly are you asking? Ford, Mercedes, and several others have spent decades and multiple millions of dollars to develop something that you want we unwashed masses to hand over to you for free. I might be missing something here, but it really seems to me that you are barking up the wrong bush.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
To put that another way :)...

You can't just slap a photosensor on a car and say "go! Park yourself". It requires mutiple sensors in strategic locations, quick and complex coding/logic, and methods to accurately and reliably control wheel speed, steering, and braking.

You can ask for help about what to research, or what problems are generally encountered in these types of applications, but asking how to build an autoparking "circuit" (since it isn't really a circuit, but a control system) won't get you very far...most of us have never built on ourselves, and if we did, I'm sure most would be reluctant (as Danger said) to give it out for free. There is a lot of information out there on the web about using photosensors to control things. Start there.

Methods of control vary greatly, and the application you are concerned with has less to do with what kind of circuit you use and more to do with the logic and controls you use.
 
Travis_King said:
To put that another way :)...

Thank you for posting that, Travis. It made me realize that I was unnecessarily (and unintentionally) rude to Moehamed, and I herewith offer him an apology.
It's no legitimate excuse, but I've been very ill for a long time, and it's irritating. I let my mood get in the way of my manners, and I'm sorry.
 
I was going to say it was a bit of a narky response. It contained a good point though.

OEMs spending millions in consulting; teams of people and years of testing still can't get it to work well even when they can design the car around the control system.
 

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K