>On 8/31/05, mchipguru@charter.net wrote: >> IOf you use a 3 axis device and do the math it will work. Think >> vectors. At rest the system will measure a 1 G down. When breaking a >> breaking acceleration will be added in as another vector so >you should >> be able to remove the 1 G and get a resultant vector.Team >190 from WPI >> did that a few years ago on their First robot when we put in an >> inertial navigation system. Larry >-----Original Message----- >From: Alex Harford [mailto:piclist-bounces@mit.edu] >Sent: 01 September 2005 22:23 > >It's too bad people have seemed to miss this post because I >think that's the only solution for a stand-alone device. I'm not convinced a third axis would be needed in practice, unless the roads in other parts of the world are excessively cambered... Regards Mike ======================================================================= This e-mail is intended for the person it is addressed to only. The information contained in it may be confidential and/or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must not make any use of this information, or copy or show it to any person. Please contact us immediately to tell us that you have received this e-mail, and return the original to us. Any use, forwarding, printing or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. No part of this message can be considered a request for goods or services. ======================================================================= -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist