Subtracting centrifugal acceleration from acceleration caused by movement

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the challenges of accurately calculating the movement of an RC plane equipped with GPS, gyroscope, and accelerometer during turns. The user observes that the plane's velocity readings become inaccurate due to centrifugal acceleration, leading to overshooting turns. They seek to subtract this centrifugal acceleration from the overall acceleration to improve accuracy. The user outlines their understanding of the necessary calculations involving centripetal force and provides formulas to determine the radius and centrifugal acceleration. They are looking for confirmation on their approach and further guidance on refining their algorithm.
sparkk
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I've been playing around with dead reckoning stuff on an rc plane by attaching a gps, 3 axis gyroscope, and 3 axis accelerometer to the plane.

When the plane isn't turning, my algorithm works pretty well however when I enter a turn, the readings get way off. Specifically, the plane appears to be moving at a faster velocity than it actually is thus all turns are overshot.

I believe I see this due to centrifugal acceleration and would like to cancel it out, but I'm getting quite lost, especially with 3d vectors. How might I go about subtracting this observed acceleration from acceleration caused by movement?

Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let me add what I have identified so far.. for at least identifying what I believe to be the acceleration component I need to subtract:

F = ma_{c} = (mv^{2})/ r = mrw^{2}

The definitions are standard as of this wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centripetal_force

I know:
(gps) speed = v
(gyroscope) angular velocity = w

I can calculate r via:
(mv^{2})/ r = mrw^{2}
v^{2}/ r = rw^{2}
v^{2} = r^{2}w^{2}
r^{2} = v^{2} / w^{2}
r = \sqrt{v^{2} / w^{2}}


With r and w known, I can now calculate a_{c} as follows:
ma_{c} = mrw^{2}
a_{c} = rw^{2}

Am I anywhere close to being on the right track? :smile:
 
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