Added orientation acceleration to message BaseMoving (solves #279)

[TBreitenbergerAumovio]

No description provided.

[ghost]

@carsten-kuebler what does the ISO say about this value?

[ghost]

Please provide an example for orientation_acceleration here.

[ghost]

Hi @TBreitenbergerConti and @CarloVanDriestenBMW,

as matrix multiplication on every timestep results in unnecessary numerical drift and as we're neither interested in relative kinematics nor in time derivatives of rotational matrices - why don't we use examples for the scalar values (which I would recommmend to update)?

For discrete time steps and no higher order integration schemes, the linear scalar formulas would be:

orientation.yaw(t) = orientation_rate.yaw(t) * dt + orientation.yaw(t-dt)
orientation.pitch(t) = orientation_rate.pitch(t) * dt + orientation.pitch(t-dt)
orientation.roll(t) = orientation_rate.roll(t) * dt + orientation.roll(t-dt)

orientation_rate.yaw(t) = orientation_acceleration.yaw(t) * dt + orientation_rate.yaw(t-dt)
orientation_rate.pitch(t) = orientation_acceleration.pitch(t) * dt + orientation_rate.pitch(t-dt)
orientation_rate.roll(t) = orientation_acceleration.roll(t) * dt + orientation_rate.roll(t-dt)

Based on the scalar value calculation, the rotation matrices can be freshly set up on every time step.

[TBreitenbergerAumovio]

Hello, yes, I agree. We can avoid that drift. I will give the chance to reply on this or make a different opinion on this topic public by waiting for several days. After this I will add the given scalar equations as example in the commented area. Von: Ludwig Friedmann <notifications@github.com> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 13. Dezember 2018 09:19 An: OpenSimulationInterface/open-simulation-interface <open-simulation-interface@noreply.github.com> Cc: Breitenberger, Thomas <Thomas.Breitenberger@continental-corporation.com>; Mention <mention@noreply.github.com> Betreff: Re: [OpenSimulationInterface/open-simulation-interface] Added orientation acceleration to message BaseMoving (solves #279) (#291) Hi @TBreitenbergerConti<https://github.com/TBreitenbergerConti> and @CarloVanDriestenBMW<https://github.com/CarloVanDriestenBMW>, as matrix multiplication on every timestep results in unnecessary numerical drift and as we're neither interested in relative kinematics nor in time derivatives of rotational matrices - why don't we use examples for the scalar values (which I would recommmend to update)? For discrete time steps and no higher order integration schemes, the linear scalar formulas would be: orientation.yaw(t) = orientation_rate.yaw(t) * dt + orientation.yaw(t-dt) orientation.pitch(t) = orientation_rate.pitch(t) * dt + orientation.pitch(t-dt) orientation.roll(t) = orientation_rate.roll(t) * dt + orientation.roll(t-dt) orientation_rate.yaw(t) = orientation_acceleration.yaw(t) * dt + orientation_rate.yaw(t-dt) orientation_rate.pitch(t) = orientation_acceleration.pitch(t) * dt + orientation_rate.pitch(t-dt) orientation_rate.roll(t) = orientation_acceleration(t) * dt + orientation_rate.roll(t-dt) Based on the scalar value calculation, the rotation matrices can be freshly set up on every time step. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#291 (comment)>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/Ap7MpJbqNuIjKGRbXVgRFbPMZ0rHA9IDks5u4g1hgaJpZM4Y5NDi>.

[TBreitenbergerAumovio]

Hello again. With a small correction for orientation roll rate: orientation_rate.roll(t) = orientation_acceleration.roll(t) * dt + orientation_rate.roll(t-dt) Von: Ludwig Friedmann <notifications@github.com> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 13. Dezember 2018 09:19 An: OpenSimulationInterface/open-simulation-interface <open-simulation-interface@noreply.github.com> Cc: Breitenberger, Thomas <Thomas.Breitenberger@continental-corporation.com>; Mention <mention@noreply.github.com> Betreff: Re: [OpenSimulationInterface/open-simulation-interface] Added orientation acceleration to message BaseMoving (solves #279) (#291) Hi @TBreitenbergerConti<https://github.com/TBreitenbergerConti> and @CarloVanDriestenBMW<https://github.com/CarloVanDriestenBMW>, as matrix multiplication on every timestep results in unnecessary numerical drift and as we're neither interested in relative kinematics nor in time derivatives of rotational matrices - why don't we use examples for the scalar values (which I would recommmend to update)? For discrete time steps and no higher order integration schemes, the linear scalar formulas would be: orientation.yaw(t) = orientation_rate.yaw(t) * dt + orientation.yaw(t-dt) orientation.pitch(t) = orientation_rate.pitch(t) * dt + orientation.pitch(t-dt) orientation.roll(t) = orientation_rate.roll(t) * dt + orientation.roll(t-dt) orientation_rate.yaw(t) = orientation_acceleration.yaw(t) * dt + orientation_rate.yaw(t-dt) orientation_rate.pitch(t) = orientation_acceleration.pitch(t) * dt + orientation_rate.pitch(t-dt) orientation_rate.roll(t) = orientation_acceleration(t) * dt + orientation_rate.roll(t-dt) Based on the scalar value calculation, the rotation matrices can be freshly set up on every time step. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#291 (comment)>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/Ap7MpJbqNuIjKGRbXVgRFbPMZ0rHA9IDks5u4g1hgaJpZM4Y5NDi>.

[ghost]

Thanks @TBreitenbergerConti, I just fixed the typo.

[ghost]

@TBreitenbergerConti could you update until Thursday evening, please? I would like to release on Friday! :)

[TimFrickeBMW]

I agree with the definition and the additional examples suggested by @LudwigFriedmannBMW and @TBreitenbergerConti .

outdated

[ghost]

@carsten-kuebler could I lend your expertise for a moment and ask how to display the formulas in doxygen the best way? As note?

[carsten-kuebler]

@CarloVanDriestenBMW we could use htmlonly mathml? should I change this in the overall documentation? If yes, I would also add htmlonly where it is necessary...

[ghost]

@carsten-kuebler Sure, if it is the way to go! We should do it in a separate PR today and I will merge this one before.

[ghost]

@TimFrickeBMW did you check the file after my commit for consistency? Is update of the documentation/definition fitting all the other definitions in the osi_common file still using the rotational matrices? It would be great to get a go from you in the next hours in order for me to merge.