Hi,

I am not sure the conversion helps. If the resulting Cartesian coordinates
tends to be zero, then the variability of the polar angle increases
dramatically.

I would suggest the following process:

1. add a huge constant to each number before averaging
2. calculate the average
3. subtract the said constant from the result

Actually the user moves the point in a secure distance from the origo.

Regards,
Imre

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Dave VanHorn wrote:

>
> >Excellent!  I hadn't thought of it that way.  A little too much math for some situations, but certianly a perspective worth keeping in mind when running into such a situation.
>
> This sounds like a problem I faced a while back, averaging compass headings.
> 90,89,91 averages to 90, no problem, but 359,0,1 averages to 180 which is dead wrong.
>
> What I did, was to convert the polar coordinates to rectangulars, then add them, then convert back to polar.
>
> I had to do 7200 of these every second, while dealing with a ton of serial traffic as well, on nine ports.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.piclist.com
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist