检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:郑振宇[1] 苑志江[1] 郑智林[1] 翟玉婷[1]
出 处:《海军工程大学学报》2017年第3期76-81,86,共7页Journal of Naval University of Engineering
摘 要:针对基于矢量定姿的惯性系对准误差等问题进行了详细的推导与比对分析。首先,建立了以矢量定姿算法为核心的惯性系对准信息流程与算法模型;然后,阐述了应用于对准中的TRAID与QUEST定姿算法原理,详细推导了两种算法的误差协方差模型,建立并分析了重力矢量观测条件下QUEST定姿对准误差与器件误差的解析关系;最后,通过蒙特卡洛多样本仿真实验对比分析了不同对准方法的对准精度与统计特性。理论分析及仿真实验表明:采用QUEST算法的对准极限精度与传统方法的相同,但在等精度观测条件下,QUEST算法的对准精度稳定性要优于TRAID算法。The error of attitude determination (AD) algorithm for SINS alignment in inertial frame is thoroughly analyzed and deduced, Firstly, an information flow and algorithm model of alignment in inertial frame is built based on AD algorithm. Secondly, two classical TRAID and QUEST AD algo- rithms for alignment are elaborated. The covariance error model of two algorithms is deduced and the numerical relationship between inertial sensors' error and alignment error is derived and analyzed un- der the gravity vector observation condition. Through Monte-Carlo simulations, the precision align- ment and static character of different AD algorithms are analyzed comparatively. Theory analysis and simulation test show that the two alignment methods with different AD have the equivalent alignment limit precision, but the QUEST algorithm can achieve better precision stability compared with TRAID under the equivalent precision observation condition.
分 类 号:U666.1[交通运输工程—船舶及航道工程]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.117