Track 2: ELECTRONICS & TELECOMMUNICATIONS

STUDY ON ORIENTATION ESTIMATION WITH THREE

DIFFERENT REPRESENTATIONS

Nguyen Ho Quoc Phuong*, Hee-Jun Kang**, Young-Soo Suh**, Young-Shick Ro**

*Department of Electrical Engineering Graduate School, University of Ulsan, Ulsan, Korea

(Tel : +82-52-259-1635; E-mail: qtquocphuong@yahoo.com)
** Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Ulsan, Ulsan, Korea
(Tel : +82-52-259-2207; E-mail: hjkang@mail.ulan.ac.kr, yssuh@mail.ulsan.ac.kr,
ysro@mail.ulsan.ac.kr)

ABSTRACT

In this paper, the comparison between the three methods: Euler, Quaternion and Direction-Cosine-
Matrix method for attitude and orientation estimation purpose are discussed. Direction-Cosine-Matrix
method was chosen as our main orientation estimation and was discussed in detail. Some calculations
are addressed to reduce the number of states for this estimation algorithm. The advantage is that
normal Kalman filter is used instead of Extended Kalman filter, so the first order approximation error
is prevented. The paper also shows some possibility ways to combine magnetic compass with
accelerometers and gyrometers.
Keywords Orientation Estimation, Direction Cosine Matrix(DCM) , Quaternion, Euler Representation

1. INTRODUCTION was generally selection [3][5]. And in order to

Orientation determination includes attitude
and heading estimation. There are three
principle methods for propagation the
transforming matrix from the differential form.
They are Euler, Direction Cosine and
Quaternion. Based on that relationship, many
kinds of orientation estimation have been
developed.
The Euler approach of propagating is
conceptually easy to understand but it has the
most computational expense and the state may
reach to singularity [1][2][5]. Quaternion
approach is computational inexpense with only
four variables updated when propagating but
they have no physical interpretation to the
motion. This leads to the difficulty in connecting
the practical measurement with quaternion states
in orientation estimator. Therefore, quaternion is
especially helpful in application which
gyroscope signal is generated with high
frequency while accelerometer signal is updated
in lower frequency. To manage quaternion-
based method’s nonlinear relationship, extended
Kalman filter with the first order approximation
reduce the error due to the first order
approximation, unscented Kalman filter was
used [4]. The Direction Cosine Matrix (DCM)
method of propagation transferring matrix,
normally with nine variables, seems to fit in
between. It is offers to be the best representation
in land vehicle navigation application [7][10].
Many estimators have been developed to get
the orientation due to the characteristic of
sensors. Whenever the difference between
sampling time is very big, error model based
estimators is preferred, in which, the process
model is propagated with high frequency, error
model is built to evaluate the dynamic error may
caused inside the process model compared with
the measurement [5]. The estimator will
estimate that error and compensate to fix the
state in lower frequency. When the sensors are
sampled with the same frequency, direct
estimator is preferred.
In this paper, DCM method is chosen and
discussed deeply. Some techniques are
addressed to reduce the number of updated
variables from nine variables in conventional to
three in the attitude estimation and six in the

International Symposium on Electrical & Electronics Engineering 2007 - Oct 24, 25 2007 - HCM City, Vietnam
-80-
 Track 2: ELECTRONICS & TELECOMMUNICATIONS

orientation estimation. And because the desired The notation “s” refers to sine and “c” refers
application is for low cost, strapdown Inertial to cosine. The transformation matrix bn C can be
Measurement Unit in which the accelerometers,
obtained with the following integration [10]:
gyrometers and magnetic compass are sampled n

at the same frequency, so direct filter has been bC = bn C [b ωnb ⊗] (2)
used.  0 −ωz ωy 
In order to combine magnetic compass to 
b  
the estimator, there also some methods are [ ωnb ⊗] =  ωz 0 −ωx  (3)
 
applied such as using directly measure vector as  −ωy ωx 0 
 
measurement [3], calculating yaw angles and Normally, whole DCM is updated.
use as measurement [5] , tilt compensating or However, we can update each line of DCM
automatically magnetic vector fixing method matrix separately as below:
[8]. In this paper, the first two methods are  bn C
31   0   b ωx 
−bn C 33 n
C 32
investigated.    b
 
n
  n  
 b 32 
C =  b C 33 0 −bn C 31   b ωy 
2. ATTITUDE ESTIMATION    n   b  (4)
 bn C
33   −b C 32 n
C 31 0   ωz 
   b  
Attitude estimation involves roll and pitch n
angle determination used the gyrometers and Where, b C 3x is the component of DCM at
accelerometers. Because the gravity vector is position (3,x) and bω x , bω y , bω z are angular
considered fixed or easily be compensated due velocity state with respect to the body-fixed
to the location of the object so it is mostly used frame which measured by gyrometers. So, even
as measurement for roll and pitch angle though using the DCM method, only three states
determination. Gyrometers play as the process need to be updated in each circle.
model in which estimated angular velocity and Measurements model using accelerometers:
previous states are used to calculate the present
step states. For roll and pitch estimation purpose bf   0   bn C 31 
 x   
only, Quaternion representation hardly to be b  n T  0  =  bn C 32  g
used because its need four variables updated as  fy  = b C    (5)
compulsory while DCM need three and Euler
b  g   n 
 fz     b C 33 
need only two. Below, Euler-based and DCM-  
based attitude estimation has been discussed. b
In this equation, fx ,y ,z are the accelerometers
data, g is gravitational acceleration.
2.1 DCM-based attitude estimation
Even though relationships in Eq.(4) means
we integrate by time the angular velocity to have
Establish DCM through the rotation matrix the true angle, however, the angles can be
from the body fixed frame to navigation frame directly produced from accelerometer data. We
has a relationship with three Euler angles: yaw use these accelerometer data as the
(ψ) , pitch (θ) , roll (φ) corresponding to measurements for the filter as Eq.(5). Output of
rotation about zz’, yy’ and then xx’, the the filter adapts from these two sources. To
transformation matrix bn C that describe the adjust the believably degree in which source, we
orientation of coordinates frames “b” with change the measurement covariance values in
respect to navigation frame “n” can be Kalman Filter.
expressed as : Apply the mechanical relationship to the
 θc ψc −φc ψs + φs θs ψc φs ψs + φc θs ψc 
Kalman Filter form:
  x
(t ) = Φt x(t ) + w(t ) (6)
n  −φs ψc + φc θs ψs 
b C =  θc ψs φc ψc + φs θs ψs
 −θ  z(t ) = Hx(t ) + v(t ) (7)
 s φs θc φc θc 
Where,
(1)
 0 3×3 C 3 
Φt =   H =  0 6× 6 I6  ,
 03×3 03×3  ,  

International Symposium on Electrical & Electronics Engineering 2007 - Oct 24, 25 2007 - HCM City, Vietnam
-81-
 Track 2: ELECTRONICS & TELECOMMUNICATIONS

 0 n
−b C 33
n 
C 32
2.2 Euler-based attitude estimation as
 b  comparison with DCM-based method
n n 
C3 =  b C 33 0 −b C 31 
  This method is described in [1]. The propag-
−n C n
0 
 b 32 b C 31 ation of Euler angles follows the equation:

With the state-variables:  φ
  1 sin φ tan θ cos φ tan θ   ωx 
b
   
 bn C 31 
  
ωz 
b b b
 θ  =  0 − sin θ   b ωy  (14)
n n
x(t ) =  b C 32 b C 33 ωx ωy cos θ
  
 ψ
  0 sin φ sec θ cos φ sec θ   b 

And measurements:      ωz 
 
z(t ) =  b fx b fy b fz b ωx b ωy b ωz  In this attitude estimation, two first line of
 
The noise covariance value of process model transfer matrix corresponding to two first
and measurement model follow: variables are needed only. Notice that this
relationship means whenever pitch angle reaches
T
 0 9 ×9 0 9× 3  π / 2 , the state will be singularity. This is the
Q = E {w(t ) w (t )} = 0 q .I 3×3
 (8)
 3×3  first drawback of Euler method.
0 3× 3 Measurement model using accelerometers:
 ra I 3×3   g sin θ 
R = E {v(t ) vT (t )} =   (9)
 0 3×3 rg I 3×3  f (θ, φ) =   (15)
g sin φ cos θ 
 
Change to discrete model using van Loan
In order to establish the filter, extended Kalman
method,
filter in this case, first derivation is applied for
 I 3×3 Cˆ3dT 
Φk =   (10) variable x = [θ φ ]T

 03×3 I 3×3  ∂f (x )
Hk (x ) = (16)
 dT 3Cˆ3CˆT3 dT 2Cˆ3  ∂x x =[θˆk− ,φˆk− ]
 
Qk = q   (11) Error from the first order approximation is
 dT 2CˆT3 dTI 3×3 
  another limitation of Euler-based method which
Accelerometer measurement noise DCM-based doesn’t have.
covariance values can be adjusted to compensate The table below shows the imaging about
the effect of external acceleration. q value is also executing speed of this DCM based attitude
chosen to maintain the smooth of output estimation compared with Euler based
response. estimation(The algorithm was tested with
1 Matlab Ver 7.1, on CPU P4 2.8 GHz):
ra = ra 0 → r , r = rg 0 → αrg 0 , q = const
α a0 g
Where, ra 0 , rg 0 is variance of static Table 1: Compare executing speed of Euler and
DCM attitude estimation for 10 seconds of
accelerometer and gyrometer data. The
measured data:
adjustment based on the following criteria: Method Euler DCM Ratio
f (ax , ay , az ) = ax2 + ay2 + az2 − 1 > σ (12) Process 25 (5x5) 36(6x6) 1/1.44
model matrix
Normalization is necessary for prevent the
Executed time 0.31 0.37 1/1.194
unit property. seconds seconds
x(i ) (13)
DCM (3, i ) i =1:3 =
∑ x (i)
i =1:3
2
3. ORIENTATION ESTIMATION
In this method, the process model is varied Orientation estimation is an extension of
as Φk is the function of Cˆ3 k . Due to its slow attitude estimation with the joining of magnetic
dynamic, state matrices can be considered as compass data. In this part, DCM based and
constant in the interval between two sampling Quaternion based orientation estimation are
times. The state matrices are in explicit form so compared. Moreover, two ways of magnetic
the filter can be prevented from the error of first compass using are examined.
order approximation.

International Symposium on Electrical & Electronics Engineering 2007 - Oct 24, 25 2007 - HCM City, Vietnam
-82-
 Track 2: ELECTRONICS & TELECOMMUNICATIONS

3.1 DCM-based Orientation Estimation more. Measurement noise covariance is given

by:
The development from attitude estimation to  µ I 3× 3 0 3× 3 
orientation using DCM method faces up with
T
R2 = E {v(t ) v (t )} =  
 0 3 ×3 rg I 3×3  (20)
many difficulties. First of all, the whole nine 
DCM components that need to be propagated is Gyrometer measurement noise covariance
very large number in comparison with parameter rg is variance of static gyrometer
Quaternion which requires four variables
data. Measurement noise covariance for C2 , µ ,
updating and Euler with three variables
updating. The second is that the whole DCM is changed with given orientation, its value
must be normalized to prevent the orthogonality is got by experience.
after every updated circle. After C3 and C2 is known, the remaining
In this part, the two filters in cascade are row of DCM can be calculated through the two
applied. By this way, computational expense for ones:
the filters is smaller than one-filter case and C C 12 C 13  = C 21 C 22 C 23  × C 31 C 32 C 33 
becomes comparable with the computational  11     
expense of quaternion method. (21)
In the cascade filter, first filter is attitude Here, the orthogonality of DCM is prevented
estimator which is described in previous part. It by equation (13), (20) and by the way C2 is
gives roll and pitch angle as outputs. Using the updated.
archived angles to find the yaw angle directly:
Xh = X cos(θ) + Y sin(θ)sin(φ) + Z sin(θ) cos(φ) 3.2 Quaternion-based Orientation Estimation
(17)
Yh = Y cos(φ) − Z sin(φ) (18) In this estimator, gyrometers still play as
ψ = arctan 2(−Yh , Xh ) (19) process model, accelerometers which measure
gravity vector and magnetic compass which
Where, X, Y, Z is three components of earth measures earth field magnetic vector play as
magnetic vector, n m . measurements.
Even though the magnetic compass 
For the quaternion q = [eT , q 4 ]T where
measures earth magnetic vector n m , direction

of this vector is preferred to use for yaw e = [q1 q2 q 3 ]T , propagation of quaternion use
determination. This way becomes more reliable measured angular velocity:
in the uncertainty environment where
q
= Ωq (22)
magnitude of the earth magnetic field changes
greatly. Where,
b b
ωnb 
Propagation procedure of the second filter is 1  [ ωnb ⊗] 
Ω= (23)
completely the same as the first one but in stead 2  −b ωTnb 0 

 
of C3 that is C2 ,
Change to the form which shows the
 0 −bn C 23 bn C 22  relationship between derivative of quaternion

  and angular velocity:
C2 =  bn C 23 0 −bn C 21 
  q
1   q4 q 3 −q2   b 
−n C n
0       ωx 
 b 22 b C 21  q
 −
 2  1  3 q4
 q q1   
  b ωy  = 1 A b ωx
With the state-variables:  = q (24)
q
3  2  2 −q1 q 4    2

x(t ) =  bn C 21 n
C 22
n
C 23
b
ωx
b
ωy
b
ωz     −q −q −q   b
ωz 
 b b  q
4 
 

 1 2 3  

And measurements given by the following Establish process model as:

equation:  q
  0(4×4) A(4×3)   q   0 
z(t ) = [θc ψs φc ψc + φs θs ψs − φs ψc + φc θs ψs ...     +  (25)
 b
 = 0 0(3×3)   b wnb   w(t )
 wnb   (3×4)    
b b b
ωibx ωiby ωibz ]
Here, we have the process model with seven
With this way, measurement is unitary and state, three quaternion and three angular velocity.
orthogonal itself , so need not to normalize any

International Symposium on Electrical & Electronics Engineering 2007 - Oct 24, 25 2007 - HCM City, Vietnam
-83-
 Track 2: ELECTRONICS & TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Measurement model use three (Strapdown IMU) with Magnetic Compass was
accelerometers, b a , and three components of made. This model is modified from the Gimbal
magnetic compass, b m . And bn C(q) is the well- IMU of Matlab Aerospace Blockset. The most
difference between the two kinds of IMU is at
known conversion between DCM and
the platform where accelerometers are attached.
quaternion as [3]:
In Strapdown IMU, the platform rotates with
 b a   b C(q) 0(3×3)   n go   va (t )
  n     respect to the moving object while that of
b  =   n  +  v (t ) (26)
 m   0(3×3) b
C(q )   m   g  Gimball IMU is kept stable.
   n   o  So, the nominal measure value of
Because the nonlinear nature of (26), Strapdown IMU is:
extended Kalman Filter approach requires first b
Aideal = nbC  n A + n ω × ( n ω × d ) + n ω
× d − n g 
order derivation around the current estimated  
state to get the Jacobian matrix: (29)
b  Where, the ideal measured acceleration
∂  a
Hk =   (27) include the acceleration in the body axes at the
∂x  b m  center of gravity, lever arm effects due to the
  x=xˆ−k
accelerometer not being at the center of gravity,
As example the element Hk (1,1) is given by:
and the Earth gravity vector. All of them are
2q − b C(1,1)q T considered in body fixed coordinate by
 1 n 1
1   multiplied with DCM matrix.
Hk (1,1) = 2q2 − bn C(1, 2)q1  n m (28)
2 2   The real measured value contains error
e + q4  
2q 3 − bn C(1, 3)q1  sources such as: uncertainty scale factor, cross
  coupling, bias state and sensors noise:
This complexity leads to the large b
Areal = b Aideal Ksf _cc kbias + vnoise (30)
computational expense even though this method
need to update fours quaternion only.
Another drawback of this method is using
n 2 ω (rad/s) ω meas(rad/s)
earth magnetic vector m which magnitude w
T hree-axis Gyroscope
always be changed in the large range of time. To 1
GAM_meas
overcome this problem, initialization must be 1
DCM
DCM

2
pqr
done carefully to find out exactly the magnitude 3
G_meas
pdot qdot rdot
and orientation of magnetic field and this vector w_dot
4 Ab
Ameas 3
A_meas
would be used during the experiment. A_b
5 CG

The table below shows the imaging about CG

6
g

executing speed of this DCM based orientation g Strapdown Accelerometer

estimation compared with Quaternion based

DCM
orientation estimation:(The algorithm was tested Mmeas 4

with Matlab Ver 7.1, on CPU P4 2.8 GHz): 7 Mag Vector M_meas
m_vec
Magnetic Compass

Table 2: Compare executing speed of

Quaternion and DCM orientation estimation for Fig. 1 Strapdown Inertial Measurement Unit
10 seconds of measured data: with Magnetic Compass.
Method Quat. DCM Ratio
Process model 49 72 1/1.47 The three axis gyroscope measures body
matrix size (7x7) (2x6x6) angular rates include the bias, inaccuracy of
Simulate 0.964 1.002 1/1.04 scale factor, cross coupling, measurement noise
executed time seconds seconds b
ωmeas = b ω.Ksfcc + ωbias + vnoise (31)
4. INERTIAL MEASUREMENT UNIT Assume we have the initial magnetic vector
SIMULINK MODEL with respect to the word coordinate. The ideal
magnetic vector can be calculated:
b
For algorithm’s illustration purposes, the M ideal = nbC n Vmag (32)
model of Strapdown Inertial Measurement Unit

International Symposium on Electrical & Electronics Engineering 2007 - Oct 24, 25 2007 - HCM City, Vietnam
-84-
 Track 2: ELECTRONICS & TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Other sensors model for magnetic compass 1.5

ERROR(DCM) [ Sp= 0.15037 , St= 0.11999 ]

and gyroscope such as the real measured value Roll Error

Pitch Error
1
contains error sources, uncertainty scale factor,
cross coupling, bias state and sensors noise, 0.5

discretization dynamics model and saturation are

deg
similar to the corresponding of accelerometers. 0

-0.5

5. SIMULATION EXAMINATION
-1

In this part, Matlab Aerospace Blockset is -1.5

0 2 4 6 8 10
used as a tool to examine the designed filter. t(s)

Generate the motion by apply angular (b)

velocity and acceleration to the Euler 6dof 1.5
ERROR(EULER) [ Sp= 0.32021 , St= 0.25382 ]

Roll Error
motion planning and Quaternion 6dof motion Pitch Error
1
planning. After that, use the Simulink
Strapdown IMU model that is described in 0.5

previous section to collect data. With the

deg
0
support of this model, algorithm testing is much
easier, singularity points can be showed out -0.5

clearly.
-1
To adjust the accuracy of algorithm, average
absolute error and maximum error performance -1.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

indices have been used: t(s)

1 N (c)
Se 
N
∑ e2 (kT ) (33) Fig. 2 Attitude estimation, ordinary case,
k =1 compared between Euler and DCM method.
Me  max e(kT ) (34) (a) DCM’s Estimated Roll and Pitch angles
k
In which, e(kT ) is the error between the compared with reference
(b) and (c) Angular error of DCM’s method
estimated angles and the true angle.
and corresponding of Euler’s. Average absolute
errors are attached with each figure title (p
5.1 Attitude estimation denoted for Roll, t for Pitch)
Simulation1: Ordinary case, examine the error
Notice: the errors of DCM tend to smaller
of each filter: DCM-based and Euler-based.
than that of Euler based attitude estimation. This
Reference signal archived from motion
aspect fits the discussion about the method error
generated model. Euler reference is given from
in part I. In this experiment, roll and pitch angle
Euler 6dof motion planning of Matlab
changing in the range of [−π / 2 : π / 2] so, there
Aerospace Blockset. DCM reference is given
from Quaternion one. is no singularity happens to Euler-based method.

Estimation(DCM) [Roll(φ ), Pitch(θ) ]

Simulation 2: Singularity case
70

Estimated roll
60 Reference roll
Estimated pitch
Whenever pitch angle reach exactly 90
50
Reference pitch degrees, there is a singularity occurs. This may
40
cause variable change unwillingly. With the
same rotation, DCM based attitude estimation
deg

30
has no bad effect even though the displays
20
angular is ambiguous as the result of the
10
conversion between the DCM states and the
0 displayed angle.
-10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
t(s)

(a)

International Symposium on Electrical & Electronics Engineering 2007 - Oct 24, 25 2007 - HCM City, Vietnam
-85-
 Track 2: ELECTRONICS & TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Pitch(θ) Estimation(EULER), S = 72.5204, M = 179.9621

400
θ θ
5.2 Orientation estimation
Estimated pitch
300 Reference pitch

200
Simulation 3: Quaternion based orientation
estimation using earth magnetic vector.
100 Estimation(DCM)[Roll(φ ), Pitch(θ), Yaw(ψ ) ]
60
deg

0
40

-100
20

-200
0

-300

deg
-20

-400
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -40
Estimated roll
t(s)
Reference roll
-60
Estimated pitch
(a) Reference pitch
Estimated Yaw
-80
Roll(φ ) Estimation(EULER), S = 2107.3958, M = 3056.4466
φ φ Reference Yaw
3500
Estimated roll -100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3000 Reference roll t(s)

2500 (a)
ERROR(DCM) [ Sp= 0.20934 , St= 0.15735, Ss= 0.21286 ]
2000 2
Error roll
deg

1500 1.5 Error Pitch

Error Yaw
1000
1

500
0.5

0 deg
0
-500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
-0.5
t(s)

(b) -1

Pitch(θ) Estimation(DCM), S = 1.0222, M = 2.2752

θ θ
100 Estimated pitch -1.5
Reference pitch
80
-2
0 2 4 6 8 10
60 t(s)

40
(b)
20
ERROR(Quaternion) [ Sp= 0.46653 , St= 0.39755, Ss= 0.40208 ]
2
deg

0
Error roll
-20 1.5 Error Pitch
Error Yaw
-40
1
-60
0.5
-80
deg

-100 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
t(s)
-0.5

(c) -1
Fig. 3 Attitude estimation, singularity case
-1.5
(a) and (b) Euler Estimated Pitch and Roll
angle compared with reference -2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
t(s)
(c) DCM Estimated Pitch angle compared
with reference. Average absolute errors and (c)
maximum error are attached with each figure Fig. 4 Orientation estimation, compared
title. between DCM’s and Quaternion’s method.
(a) DCM’s Estimated Roll, Pitch and Yaw
Notice: In (a), the Euler estimated Pitch angles compared with reference
angle starts to be wrong when it reachs 90 (b) and (c) Angular error of DCM’s method
degrees. As the co-effect, roll angle, (c), is and corresponding of Quaternion’s. Average
wrong too. Because of the quantization reason, absolute errors are attached with each figure title
not every time pitch angle goes through (p denoted for Roll, t for Pitch, s for Yaw)
singularity points, this case happens.
Notice: Error of DCM based orientation
estimation is smaller those of quaternion as

International Symposium on Electrical & Electronics Engineering 2007 - Oct 24, 25 2007 - HCM City, Vietnam
-86-
 Track 2: ELECTRONICS & TELECOMMUNICATIONS

shown in the simulation. With quaternion 6. CONCLUSION

method it is hardly to adjust the noise
covariance values due to three parameters that DCM based attitude estimation is the better
are changed at the same time for two couple of choice rather than Euler in the view of the
sensors: gyrometer-accelerometer and balance between accuracy and computational
gyrometer- magnetic compass. With given DCM effort and rather than Quaternion in both of view
method, measurement noise covariance of point.
accelerometer and gyrometers can be adjusted When extending to orientation estimation,
first, after that gyrometers and magnetic input Quaternion with the advantage of fours variable
could be changed after, separately. updating only and easy normalizing becomes the
most selected method. This paper presents the
5.3 Compare with commercial product new method that using DCM but reach to the
Quaternion about the computational effort and
This experiment uses XSens’s MTi accuracy.
28A13G35 IMU as the measurement unit. And In given method, noise covariance
also uses the compact calculated angles of adjustments between gyrometers-accelerometer
XSens to compare with that of our estimators. and gyrometers-magnetic compass are done
100
Pitch(θ) Estimation(DCM), S = 0.98226, M = 4.6152
θ θ separately that allows a flexible reliability
80
justice in certain environment.
60
Instead of extended Kalman filter in Euler-
40
based and Quaternion-based method, the normal
20
Kalman filter in DCM-based method can help
prevent the error the first order approximation.
deg

-20
The still limitation of this method is that
-40
measurement noise covariance of magnetic
-60
compass could not be accessed directly. Even
-80 Estimated pitch though it gives another advantage that the
Reference pitch
-100
algorithm can give result at large range of earth
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
t(s) magnetic field magnitude without initialization
(a) and calibration.
ERROR(DCM) [ Sp= 1.904 , St= 0.98226, Ss= 2.1001 ]
10
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
5
The authors would like to express financial
0 supports from NARC(Network-based
Automation Research Center), post-BK(Brain
deg

-5
Korea) 21 program and Korea Research
-10
Foundation Grant (KRF-2005-D00238)
respectively.
Error roll
-15
Error Pitch
Error Yaw
REFERENCES
-20
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
t(s)
[1] Young-Soo Suh, Sang-Kyeong Park, Hee-
(b) Jun Kang, Young-Shick Ro “Attitude
Fig. 5 DCM based Orientation estimation, Estimation Adaptively Compensating
compared with commercial product. Average External Acceleration” JSME International
absolute errors and maximum error are attached Journal, 2006, Series C, Vol.49, No 1.
with each figure title (p denoted for Roll, t for [2] Nguyen Ho Quoc Phuong, Hee-Jun Kang,
Pitch, s for Yaw) Young-Soo Suh, Young-Shick Ro, Kyu-
Notice: For the rotation only experiment, Chan Lee. “A GPS/ INS Integration System
our DCM-based estimator gives not much for Land Vehicle Application”, SICE-
difference (2 degrees absolute average error) ICASE, International Joint Conference,
2006.

International Symposium on Electrical & Electronics Engineering 2007 - Oct 24, 25 2007 - HCM City, Vietnam
-87-
 Track 2: ELECTRONICS & TELECOMMUNICATIONS

[3] Sabatini, A. M. “Quaternion-Based

Extended Kalman Filter for Determining
Orientation by Inertial and Magnetic
Sensing” IEEE Transaction on biomedical
engineering, JULY 2006, VOL. 53, NO. 7
[4] Guang-Fu Ma, X. J., ”Unscented Kalman
Filter for Spacecraft Attitude Estimation
and Calibration Using Magnetometer
Measurements”, Machine Learning and
Cybernetics. Proceedings of 2005
International Conference, 2005.
[5] Demoz Gebre-egziabher, J.D.P.“Design of
multi-sensor attitude determination
systems” IEEE Transactions on aerospace
and electronic systems, APRIL 2004, VOL.
40, NO. 2
[6] Chroust, S. G. & Vincze, M. ”Fusion of
Vision and Inertial Data for Motion and
Structure Estimation”, Journal of Robotic
Systems, 2004, 21(2), 73–83
[7] Choukroun, D. “Novel methods for attitude
determination using vector observation”,
Phdthesis , Israel Inst. Technol., Haifa,Israel,
2003.
[8] Daniel Roetenberg, C. T. M. B. & Peter H.
Veltink, I.”Compensation of Magnetic
Disturbances Improves Inertial and
Magnetic Sensing of Human Body Segment
Orientation”, IEEE Transactions on neural
systems and rehabilitation engineering,
2005, VOL.13, NO. 3,
[9] Henrik Rehbinder & Hu, Xiaoming “Drift-
free attitude estimation for accelerated rigid
bodies”, Science Direct - Automatica, ,
April 2004, Volume 40, Issue 4, Pages 653-
659
[10] Salah Sukkarieh, Eduardo M. Nebot, and
Hugh F. Durrant-Whyte, “A High Integrity
IMU/GPS Navigation Loop for
Autonomous Land Vehicle Applications”-
IEEE Transactions on Robotics and
Automation, VOL. 15, NO. 3, JUNE 1999

International Symposium on Electrical & Electronics Engineering 2007 - Oct 24, 25 2007 - HCM City, Vietnam
-88-