Differences between revisions 19 and 25 (spanning 6 versions)
Revision 19 as of 2011-02-26 22:39:30
Size: 1796
Comment:
Revision 25 as of 2011-02-26 22:56:02
Size: 2000
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 14: Line 14:
$ \large D ~ = ~ {\sqrt{2({A^2}{B^2}+{A^2}{C^2}+{B^2}{C^2})-({A^4}+{B^4}+{C^4})}\over{2C}} $ $ \large D = {\sqrt{2({A^2}{B^2}+{A^2}{C^2}+{B^2}{C^2})-({A^4}+{B^4}+{C^4})}\over{2C}} $
Line 18: Line 18:
$ \large {{\partial D}\over{\partial A}} ~ = ~ { { A({B^2}+{C^2}-{A^2}) } \over { 2 {C^2} D } } $ $ \large {{\partial D}\over{\partial A}} = { { A({B^2}+{C^2}-{A^2}) } \over { 2 {C^2} D } } ~ ~ ~ ~ $
$ \large {{\partial D}\over{\partial B}} = { { B({A^2}+{C^2}-{B^2}) } \over { 2 {C^2} D } } ~ ~ ~ ~ $
$ \large {{\partial D}\over{\partial C}} = { ({{A^2}+{B^2})-({C^2}+2{D^2}) } \over { 2 C D } } $
Line 20: Line 22:
$ \large {{\partial D}\over{\partial B}} ~ = ~ { { B({A^2}+{C^2}-{B^2}) } \over { 2 {C^2} D } } $ If D is small, these partials are very large. Assume that $ A \approx B $ (but ''not'' the same!) and that $ C = 2A - \epsilon $, and $ D << A $. This is the case if we are measuring the center point on a wide, very shallow and approximately symmetrical triangle.
Line 22: Line 24:
$ \large {{\partial D}\over{\partial C}} ~ = ~ { ({{A^2}+{B^2})-({C^2}+2{D^2}) } \over { 2 C D } } $ Our equations reduce to:
Line 24: Line 26:
If D is small, these partials are very large. Assume that $ A \approx B $ (but ''not'' the same!) and that $ C = 2A + \epsilon $, where $ D << A $. This is the case if we are measuring the center point on a wide, very shallow and approximately symmetrical triangle.

Our partials reduce to:
$ \large D \approx \sqrt { A \epsilon } ~ ~ ~ ~ $
$ \large {{\partial D}\over{\partial A}} \approx {{\partial D}\over{\partial B}} \approx {-{{\partial D}\over{\partial C}}} \approx { A \over { 2 D } } $

Stability

The main issue with stability is that perturbations exceeding a few millimeters from the ideal path ( as determined by ambient forces acting on the track ) cannot be corrected by track to rotor spacing alone. Given inaccurate force measurements, and track measurements, it is very easy for such perturbations to appear, indetectably.

Stability can be achieved by applying damping forces to the curvature, some constant \large { \partial \over { \partial t } } { { \partial^2 } \over { \partial L^2 } } ( L is the distance along the track ) added to the spacing forces. The big problem is measuring the curvature, which is exceedingly difficult to do for millimeter scale lateral displacements over track distances of tens of kilometers.

triangle distance

Suppose we are trying to estimate distance D from three precision measurements for A, B, C. We can compute D from this formula:

\large D = {\sqrt{2({A^2}{B^2}+{A^2}{C^2}+{B^2}{C^2})-({A^4}+{B^4}+{C^4})}\over{2C}}

The sensitivity of D to errors in A , B , and C is just the partials:

\large {{\partial D}\over{\partial A}} = { { A({B^2}+{C^2}-{A^2}) } \over { 2 {C^2} D } } ~ ~ ~ ~ \large {{\partial D}\over{\partial B}} = { { B({A^2}+{C^2}-{B^2}) } \over { 2 {C^2} D } } ~ ~ ~ ~ \large {{\partial D}\over{\partial C}} = { ({{A^2}+{B^2})-({C^2}+2{D^2}) } \over { 2 C D } }

If D is small, these partials are very large. Assume that A \approx B (but not the same!) and that C = 2A - \epsilon , and D << A . This is the case if we are measuring the center point on a wide, very shallow and approximately symmetrical triangle.

Our equations reduce to:

\large D \approx \sqrt { A \epsilon } ~ ~ ~ ~ \large {{\partial D}\over{\partial A}} \approx {{\partial D}\over{\partial B}} \approx {-{{\partial D}\over{\partial C}}} \approx { A \over { 2 D } }

MORE LATER

Stability (last edited 2011-02-27 07:17:58 by KeithLofstrom)