You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
N.B. I have tested this using a manual sensor with data gathered previously, both with and without magnetometer values (using Madgwick and Analytical, respectively).
EDIT: Based on further review, I believe that R_init is not ignored entirely, but valid rotation matricies don't produce the desired effect (see below). I have therefore removed some previous analysis in this post.
I am new to IMUs and kinematics in general, so if I have made some error, I deeply apologise.
Thank you for your time.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
UPDATE: Using the initOrientation above (which I believe should be a 45 degree rotation around the z axis) results in an initial quaternion of
[ 1.00000000e+00 -6.93889390e-18 1.73472348e-18 8.67361738e-19]
Instead of the usual [1,0,0,0]. So it appears that R_init is having an effect, but a much milder one than anticipated.
Furthermore, rotation matrices such as the ones used here do not produce any deviation from the default orientation, when it should produce a 180 degree rotation around the Z axis.
EmpireOfTheTsun
changed the title
Visualising a manual sensor ignores R_init
R_init doesn't work as intended with manual sensors.
Aug 18, 2020
N.B. I have tested this using a manual sensor with data gathered previously, both with and without magnetometer values (using Madgwick and Analytical, respectively).
EDIT: Based on further review, I believe that R_init is not ignored entirely, but valid rotation matricies don't produce the desired effect (see below). I have therefore removed some previous analysis in this post.
I am new to IMUs and kinematics in general, so if I have made some error, I deeply apologise.
Thank you for your time.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: