editor's blog
Subscribe Now

Gravity Leaking

I recently had a wide-ranging discussion with Kevin Shaw, CTO of Sensor Platforms. It originated out of this nagging thing I had going on in my head about what can be done exclusively with accelerometers. Early thoughts on the topic stimulated my whimsical figure skating article, but my curiosity hadn’t been satisfied.

The gist of my thinking was that, while, in general, you need an accelerometer and a gyroscope to establish both direction and orientation, if you were in a fixed frame like an automobile, then your direction established your heading, so knowing your direction meant knowing your heading. And you can get direction from an accelerometer. You could even get altitude change by detecting vertical acceleration.

Turns out it’s not quite that simple. Let’s say you’re out in a flat surface (like Nebraska) with an accelerometer that’s perfectly flat – that is to say, coplanar with your flat surface. If it’s a 2-axis accelerometer, then it won’t notice gravity, which would be orthogonal to the two sensed axes. If (as is more likely) you had a 3-axis sensor, then the Z element would detect gravity, and you would subtract that out.

So in both cases, you would calibrate to zero vertical acceleration. And as you drove around on the flatlands, you could figure out where you were. But at some point, you’re going to encounter a hill. Or heck, even an overpass. Now you’ll move vertically. And that’s where it gets tricky.

If you had your sensor mounted in a flexible way that guaranteed it would always remain flat (that is, with gravity being perfectly down), no matter where the car goes, then things would still work. But most of us don’t have that: as we go up a hill, our car tilts, as does any sensor in the car. Gravity is no longer in the Z direction. And we’re only subtracting out gravity in the Z direction. So now gravity is going to show up in some other direction. Not full gravity, perhaps, but a component of it.

The sensor can’t tell whether that appearance of gravity represents gravity in a tilted sensor or acceleration in a flat sensor. And gravity is a large acceleration compared to what our cars can do, so just the mere tilting of the car will suddenly result in a large “leakage” of gravity into the other directions, misleading the accelerometer. That leakage will also reduce what the accelerometer sees in the Z direction, making it think you’re levitating.

This is all the stuff of thought experiments, since we do have and use gyroscopes to eliminate the ambiguity. But I found it an interesting insight into how some of these calculations work as well as a minute aspect of what the sensor fusion guys have to deal with.

Leave a Reply

featured blogs
Oct 16, 2019
In this week's Whiteboard Wednesdays video, David Peña discusses Cadence'€™s focus on models for various emerging memory standards. https://youtu.be/_Xps6I6kE0E [[ Click on the title to access the full blog on the Cadence Community site. ]]...
Oct 15, 2019
As technology advances, it's becoming harder and harder to know what is real and what isn't....
Oct 14, 2019
My working life includes a lot of writing – blogs, articles, conference papers and white papers are typical of what I produce. A common factor of my writing is that it is aimed to be technical and instructive. What I do not like writing is sales pitches. I can accept th...
Oct 14, 2019
In 1995, I attended a seminar in which the presenter told us that copper was dead.  This sort of statement is not new. The connector market is filled with armchair pundits who predict the demise of everything from D-Subminiature connectors (which are very much alive and ...
Oct 11, 2019
[From the last episode: We looked at subroutines in computer programs.] We saw a couple weeks ago that some memories are big, but slow (flash memory). Others are fast, but not so big '€“ and they'€™re power-hungry to boot (SRAM). This sets up an interesting problem. When ...