Go Down

Topic: Experience with dead-reckoning navigation? (Read 775 times) previous topic - next topic

tim7

Hello,
Has anybody got any experience with gryo and accelerometer sensors?  I'm wondering how fast the errors accumulate when calculating relative-position by dead-reckoning.  For example, if a rover equipped with one of these sensors sets off to do a lap of a room, how near could it get to its starting point after (say) a minute?

cr0sh

I don't have any experience with your parts, but I was recently looking into the issue - which isn't technically "dead reckoning", but more "inertial navigation":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_navigation_system

Note the graph at the top - note how poor the accuracy is compared to say, D/GPS...

With that said, I am sure those numbers have to do with actual vehicles (airplanes and/or missles/rockets - most likely) in real-world conditions over large distances. A robot in a room with a perfectly flat floor (and little wheel slipage) would likely fair better. But as soon as you start adding other needs (carpeted floor, irregular surfaces, etc) - navigational accuracy likely goes down quickly...
I will not respond to Arduino help PM's from random forum users; if you have such a question, start a new topic thread.

tim7

Yes, sorry, I used completely the wrong term.  Inertial positioning is what I should have said.

What I have in mind is double-integrating the 3D acceleration to get position, assuming the sensor does not rotate.  Then I'd like to remove the rotation constraint by incorporating readings from a gyro.

The specs for reasonably-priced sensors seem amazingly good, but of course the errors will grow enormously once integrated over time.  The 650m/hr figure on Wikipedia is discouraging.

Go Up
 


Please enter a valid email to subscribe

Confirm your email address

We need to confirm your email address.
To complete the subscription, please click the link in the email we just sent you.

Thank you for subscribing!

Arduino
via Egeo 16
Torino, 10131
Italy