[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Why krooz use int_euler stabilization

From: Eduardo lavratti
Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Why krooz use int_euler stabilization
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 17:32:59 -0200

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

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


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 <address@hidden> 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 stableļ¼Œ 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:
Sent from the paparazzi-devel mailing list archive at

Paparazzi-devel mailing list

_______________________________________________ Paparazzi-devel mailing list address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]