Acceleration on a Rollercoaster (And Integration to Velocity)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on integrating accelerometer data from a model rollercoaster to calculate velocity throughout the ride, particularly through loops and hills. The challenge lies in accounting for gravity's effect on the accelerometer readings when the coaster is tilted, requiring real-time integration of the data. Participants suggest determining the angle of the bank to adjust for gravity and emphasize the need for known initial conditions to ensure accurate calculations. The conversation also touches on the potential for high accuracy in accelerometer technology, referencing its use in missile guidance systems. Accurate integration techniques are deemed essential for matching calculated results with actual performance.
DLDude
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hey everyone. I'm working on a project that will incorporate a wireless accelerometer on a model rollercoaster. My issue is that we wish to take the accelerometer data and integrate it to give us our velocity through any part of the ride. This in turn will help us determine losses, etc. My issue is that the rollercoaster has loops and hills. It would be easy to integrate the 'X' accelerometer data on a flat plane, however since the coaster will be angled up or down depending on the part of the ride, you'd have to consider the affect of gravity in the 'x' direction when the car is tilted. This can be done easily with vectors by hand, but we need to be able to integrate in real time using pure accelerometer data (which is in normal values such as 'x=1.00 y=.40'.

Attached is a photo explaining my axises.




I know the Wiimote does something like this. My guess is we'd need to determine the angle of the bank and then take out the gravity aspect. That could become hard because through a loop, the Y axis data will be very large (along the lines of 5-6G's), so you cannot just compare the X and Y data and do some math there.

Any ideas?
 

Attachments

  • Accelprob.jpg
    Accelprob.jpg
    10.8 KB · Views: 400
Physics news on Phys.org
The issue is that you need some known initial conditions so you know which direction gravity is relative to the accelerometer. Then you'd hope that your integration (perhaps numerical) is accurate enough so that the calculated results very close match the actual results.
 
Initial height could be pretty standard, plus it will begin horizontally. I have a hunch you mean there would have to be a pre-set track configuration to match the graphed results to.
 
DLDude said:
Initial height could be pretty standard, plus it will begin horizontally. I have a hunch you mean there would have to be a pre-set track configuration to match the graphed results to.
The configuration information isn't needed the accelerometer and integration techinque are accurate enough, but it would have to be very accurate.

Note that internal inertia based guideance systems were used on early long range missles, so high accuracy is possible, but I don't know how accurate your accelerometer is or the effect of accuracy versus distance or time varies versus accuracy.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top