Ask Your Question

Revision history [back]

click to hide/show revision 1
initial version

No, the sign is reversed from what you are saying. The z-axis measurement is reported as +9.81 if the sensor's z-axis points upward (toward the sky.) See https://www.ros.org/reps/rep-0145.html#data-reporting which explicltly describes how to handle this case (because it is non-intuitive.)

No, the sign is reversed from what you are saying. The z-axis measurement is reported as +9.81 if the sensor's z-axis points upward (toward the sky.) See https://www.ros.org/reps/rep-0145.html#data-reporting which explicltly describes how to handle this case (because it is non-intuitive.)

If I were defining this, I would have done it the way you suggest. But apparently somebody decided that it made sense to describe the acceleration as "the object is experiencing +1.0G along the z-axis."

No, the sign is reversed from what you are saying. The z-axis measurement is reported as +9.81 if the sensor's z-axis points upward (toward the sky.) See https://www.ros.org/reps/rep-0145.html#data-reporting which explicltly describes how to handle this case (because it is non-intuitive.)

If I were defining this, I would have done Here's one way to think about it: imagine the robot is floating in space, with wheels touching a metal plate. The plate has to accelerate up the z-axis at 9.8 m/s^2 for the robot to experience the same forces it does on earth. Therefore both the way you suggest. But apparently somebody decided that it made sense to describe plate and the acceleration as "the object is experiencing +1.0G robot are accelerating along the z-axis."z-axis at +9.8 m/s^2.