How to derive an average output from a triaxial accelerometer

Click For Summary
To derive an average output from a triaxial accelerometer, one method suggested is calculating the vector average using the formula x = √(a² + b² + c²), where a, b, and c are the accelerometer readings. However, this approach only provides magnitude and loses the sign of acceleration, which may not be ideal for all applications. For assessing oscillatory movement and damping effects, focusing on the highest amplitude channel or analyzing min and max values could be more effective. More sophisticated methods could involve examining impulse and frequency response to gain deeper insights into vibrational behavior. Ultimately, the choice of method depends on the specific needs of the analysis.
TS@QS
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi
I am measuring the acceleration of an oscillating body with a triaxial accelerometer. I want to derive some kind of vector average of the 3 channel output. Someone suggested using
x= √(a squared + b squared + c squared)
... where x is the vector average and a, b and c are the accelerometry readings for each channel. Someone else told me that this isn't ideal but I don't really understand why not. Please help - is it better to just take the mean of all 3... or even just to choose the largest amplitude channel and use that?
Thanks
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
I think your method is just fine, kind of depends on what your needs are. You lose the "sign" of the acceleration with that method, just results in a magnitude. You could also look at the min and max values, or min and max amplitudes on each channel.
 
thanks - well , I'm using the acceleration as a surrogate for amplitude of displacement. I want to compare the oscillatory movement before and after applying a damping system to decide if there is an 'average' damping effect overall.
 
Since you are just looking for a relative change, looking at the highest amplitude channel probably works fine. Acquire all the data you can, then mine it for whatever looks most useful.
 
thanks, I'll try that.
I was just wondering why i was told that there are better more sophisticated methods and what these could feasibly entail?
 
You could certainly get into looking at impulse and frequency response for different damping. Vibrational response is a whole field in and of its own.
 
Had my central air system checked when it sortta wasn't working. I guess I hadn't replaced the filter. Guy suggested I might want to get a UV filter accessory. He said it would "kill bugs and particulates". I know UV can kill the former, not sure how he thinks it's gonna murder the latter. Now I'm finding out there's more than one type of UV filter: one for the air flow and one for the coil. He was suggesting we might get one for the air flow, but now we'll have to change the bulb...

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
24K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
3K