It is no secret that FreightSnap has pioneered the use of Infrared technology with Dimensioning Systems. Recently, one of the Dimensioner Manufacturers, who utilizes Lidar technology threw out some old and debunked views about the differences between Lidar and Infrared technology. I felt compelled to set the record straight once and for all. First of all, I have no ill will toward Lidar technologies and when contrasting Dimensioning units with the different technologies, I always state my opinion that I feel the Lidar products are very good. They are just really expensive for the stated purpose of what we are trying to do. That is measure palletized freight. First of all, let’s clear the air. All of the units are tested to be used in a “Legal For Trade” scenario. Secondly, they are tested with all kinds of colors and materials so as to make sure that these devices can be trusted in a wide array of environments and applications. The entire purpose of testing is to give the user the confidence that they can trust the results. So when a Lidar company comes out and says they do it better, that is disingenuous at best, and misleading at worst.
As far as technological differences, it is pretty straight forward. Infrared can be utilized in a static position and lidar must be rotated or moved across a surface to produce the data to measure pallets. Both technologies utilize light and reflection to produce the data.
With regards to accuracy, it depends upon your application. If you are trying to measure a pallet to within ½” then either technology provides you with the accuracy level to achieve your goal. If you are wanting accuracy down to 1/10th of an inch, then a laser would have a better chance to provide that level of accuracy, however no product has ever been tested to that level. In logistics, ½” has always been an acceptable standard.
Cost wise, there is a huge difference. And this is where the Lidar vendors start to grit their teeth. Lidar devices are on a cost magnitude 4 times as expensive as an infrared sensor and they also require expensive moving chassis and calibration to make them work. Infrared devices can work from a fixed position and thus are much less expensive to calibrate and mount. When someone says you get what you pay for, then in this case that is right. You either get cost effective infrared to measure within ½” or very expensive Lidar to measure within ½”. So when you pay more for Lidar, that is what you get, Lidar.
In the article about the two technologies, it was mentioned that Infrared has trouble with Black or other colors. This is old news and a talking point that goes back to ten years ago. It is true that some of the original Infrared sensors were created to run on lower frequencies and did indeed have trouble with some colors. Over time, as with any emerging technology, the manufacturers address short comings and create better products. Today’s Infrared sensors are faster, run at higher frequencies, and have no issues with colors of any kind.
Someone once asked me why the other companies utilize Lidar when it puts them at such a cost disadvantage? My answer is pretty simple. They had a 4-year Head start and made the decision to use Lidar because Infrared wasn’t available at the time. Once you head down a road, it is hard to take a step in a different direction. Especially if you have sales people bad mouthing the other technology. That being said, many Lidar companies are racing to come up with Infrared solutions.
In summary, advances in technology help bring efficiency to businesses and promote productivity. That being said, there is an ROI when adopting new technologies, and today’s companies are more in tune with that way of thinking. They no longer are taking the conservative approach and just throwing money at solutions. They are more open minded to new thinking, to newer technologies, and most of all, to spending wisely. The technology must match the application. Using Lidar for pallet measurement is like bringing a sledge hammer to pound a nail. It will get it done quite effectively, but an actual hammer will do, and the hammer is much less expensive.
