Picking a gyro for field-centric swerve control

[Golto]

We used a vector-based system for our drivetrain this year. We used an X and Y gyro to calculate our first vector, and joystick data to calculate the second. By using wheel encoders rather than the joystick data, theoretically you should get a vector that would be more useful in getting absolute position. (We were only compensating for drifts in the joystick and the tenancy of the wheels to drift.)

Of course, redundancy is good. finding the average value of these, we were recording a 1.8% Margin of Error throughout the CT regional and a 2.1% in Atlanta. While not perfect, it's certainly better than we expected, as we know that our gyros had a 1% drift on the X axis and an 8% drift on the Y. (Found by graphing signal over 100 reads on a stable surface.)

[ayeckley]

Originally Posted by Golto

We used an X and Y gyro to calculate our first vector, and joystick data to calculate the second.

You lost me there; did you mean X and Y accelerometers? If you really did mean gyro (meaning yaw rate gyro), what axes did X and Y correspond with? Z seems to be the only one of interest...

[Golto]

Originally Posted by ayeckley

You lost me there; did you mean X and Y accelerometers? If you really did mean gyro (meaning yaw rate gyro), what axes did X and Y correspond with? Z seems to be the only one of interest...

One was mounted as documented on the X axis, while the other was oriented 90 degrees to the X, on the Y axis (we used that to do an inverse-pendulum system, so we could balance and travel across the bump)