by i-Bot » Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:39 pm
by i-Bot
Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:39 pm
Accelerometer measure acceleration exactly as they say. To get position you have to integrate the signal output twice. Integration intoduces large errors which accumulate to make the measurement of position almost useless. Accelerometers also detect the acceleration due to gravity, so are best for determining orientation about a vertical axis, which is why they are used so much in robotics.
Measuring distance travelled is better done with a direct position measurement. This depends on the scale (millimetres, metres, kilometers) and the relationship of the device to its surroundings ( wheels, known environment, fixed or autonomous). Different techniques can then be used including encoders, cameras, gps, laser, IR.
So I don't think accelerometers will do it for you, but there is usually a way.
Accelerometer measure acceleration exactly as they say. To get position you have to integrate the signal output twice. Integration intoduces large errors which accumulate to make the measurement of position almost useless. Accelerometers also detect the acceleration due to gravity, so are best for determining orientation about a vertical axis, which is why they are used so much in robotics.
Measuring distance travelled is better done with a direct position measurement. This depends on the scale (millimetres, metres, kilometers) and the relationship of the device to its surroundings ( wheels, known environment, fixed or autonomous). Different techniques can then be used including encoders, cameras, gps, laser, IR.
So I don't think accelerometers will do it for you, but there is usually a way.