Why krooz use int_euler stabilization

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Why krooz use int_euler stabilization

Eltonwu
I don't know the difference between the quat and euler

I fly with int_euler stabilization and quat stabilization.

I found a little difference. the euler seems to be more stable, quat generates a little vibration. but quat seens to be more robust


All right, the above is all my guess and experiment result.

So the question is. WHY the krooz use euler instead of quat?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why krooz use int_euler stabilization

flixr
Administrator
Hi,

which stabilization system you use is not tied to the board.
The euler implementation is easier to understand, but can't deal with the singularities that a Euler representation inherently has...
Why Sergey chose int_euler I don't know... how stable it flies IMHO mostly depends on tuning (the same parameters for both won't give you the same result).

Cheers, Felix


On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 3:52 AM, Eltonwu <[hidden email]> wrote:
I don't know the difference between the quat and euler

I fly with int_euler stabilization and quat stabilization.

I found a little difference. the euler seems to be more stable, quat
generates a little vibration. but quat seens to be more robust


All right, the above is all my guess and experiment result.

So the question is. WHY the krooz use euler instead of quat?



--
View this message in context: http://lists.paparazziuav.org/Why-krooz-use-int-euler-stabilization-tp16646.html
Sent from the paparazzi-devel mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
Paparazzi-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel


_______________________________________________
Paparazzi-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why krooz use int_euler stabilization

agressiva
only to confirm ... i  testes krooz with both and not see any difference.


Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 19:32:50 +0100
From: [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Why krooz use int_euler stabilization

Hi,

which stabilization system you use is not tied to the board.
The euler implementation is easier to understand, but can't deal with the singularities that a Euler representation inherently has...
Why Sergey chose int_euler I don't know... how stable it flies IMHO mostly depends on tuning (the same parameters for both won't give you the same result).

Cheers, Felix


On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 3:52 AM, Eltonwu <[hidden email]> wrote:
I don't know the difference between the quat and euler

I fly with int_euler stabilization and quat stabilization.

I found a little difference. the euler seems to be more stable, quat
generates a little vibration. but quat seens to be more robust


All right, the above is all my guess and experiment result.

So the question is. WHY the krooz use euler instead of quat?



--
View this message in context: http://lists.paparazziuav.org/Why-krooz-use-int-euler-stabilization-tp16646.html
Sent from the paparazzi-devel mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
Paparazzi-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel


_______________________________________________ Paparazzi-devel mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel

_______________________________________________
Paparazzi-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Why krooz use int_euler stabilization

Eltonwu
In reply to this post by flixr
Thank you very much