|
|
|
Main Menu
|
|
Sections
Meta
Talkback
Downloads
Information
|
|
|
|
|
example of relative attitude and error quaternions
|
(Example)
|
|
|
This companion article belongs to the PhysicsLibrary entry relative attitude and error quaternions. All exercises are stated first. Complete solutions appear only after the exercise section.
We use the actual attitude , desired attitude , left error
 |
(1) |
and right error
 |
(2) |
The quaternions are unit, Hamilton multiplication is used, and components are displayed scalar first.
Starting from
, derive
.
Starting from
, derive
.
Show that the two error definitions satisfy
 |
(3) |
The actual attitude is a yaw and the desired attitude is a yaw. Find the exact error quaternion and its axis angle form.
The actual attitude is
 |
(4) |
and the desired attitude is
 |
(5) |
Compute the left error
.
For the same attitudes as Exercise 5, compute the right error
and verify that it differs from the left error.
Given
 |
(6) |
recover the exact error angle and axis.
Given the small error quaternion
 |
(7) |
estimate the small rotation vector using the first order approximation.
A relative quaternion is computed as
 |
(8) |
Choose the equivalent representative appropriate for a principal small error interpretation and estimate the small rotation vector.
Show that if
![$\displaystyle \delta q\approx \begin{bmatrix} 1\\ [1mm] \frac12\delta\boldsymbol\theta \end{bmatrix},$ $\displaystyle \delta q\approx \begin{bmatrix} 1\\ [1mm] \frac12\delta\boldsymbol\theta \end{bmatrix},$](https://images.physicslibrary.org/cache/objects/1108/l2h/img19.png) |
(9) |
then the norm error is second order in
.
Suppose the actual attitude is exactly equal to the desired physical attitude, but the stored quaternions are and . Compute and explain why this is not a large physical attitude error.
If a small right error is
 |
(10) |
and the current attitude matrix is , write the expression for the corresponding inertial resolved small error.
An error state estimator uses a right error but injects its correction according to
. What is inconsistent about this update?
Why is the raw difference between desired and actual yaw-pitch-roll triples not, in general, an exact attitude error vector?
A controller receives an error quaternion with scalar part near zero. What physical attitude error magnitude does this indicate, and why should sign selection be handled carefully there?
Let the principal error quaternion be
 |
(11) |
Find the error axis, exact angle, and first order small angle approximation. Comment on whether the first order approximation is appropriate.
From
 |
(12) |
right multiply by . Since ,
 |
(13) |
From
 |
(14) |
left multiply by . Since ,
 |
(15) |
Substitute the right error into the expression
:
 |
(16) |
Therefore
 |
(17) |
The desired yaw exceeds the actual yaw by , so
 |
(18) |
The error axis is
and the error angle is .
Here
 |
(19) |
Therefore
because
.
The right error is
because
. The component has the opposite sign from the left error. The two describe the same relative rotation resolved in different coordinates.
The scalar and vector magnitudes are
 |
(22) |
Thus
 |
(23) |
The axis is
.
For small error,
 |
(24) |
Therefore
 |
(25) |
Choose the equivalent sign with positive scalar part:
 |
(26) |
Then
 |
(27) |
The squared norm of the first order approximation is
![$\displaystyle \left\lVert \begin{bmatrix} 1\\ [1mm]\frac12\delta\boldsymbol\theta \end{bmatrix}\right\rVert^2 =1+\frac14\lVert\delta\boldsymbol\theta\rVert^2.$ $\displaystyle \left\lVert \begin{bmatrix} 1\\ [1mm]\frac12\delta\boldsymbol\theta \end{bmatrix}\right\rVert^2 =1+\frac14\lVert\delta\boldsymbol\theta\rVert^2.$](https://images.physicslibrary.org/cache/objects/1108/l2h/img56.png) |
(28) |
Hence the departure from unit norm is second order in the small rotation magnitude.
If , then
 |
(29) |
The quaternions and both represent the identity physical rotation. Thus the relative quaternion is an alternate representative of zero attitude error, not a control correction. For a local error model one would flip the sign to .
To first order,
 |
(30) |
The numerical value cannot be found without the current attitude matrix.
A right error convention requires correction on the right:
 |
(31) |
The proposed update multiplies on the left and therefore applies a left error correction while the estimator covariance and Jacobians describe a right error.
Euler angle coordinates depend on the chosen rotation sequence and are nonlinear coordinates on orientation space. Subtracting two angle triples does not, in general, produce the axis and angle of the finite relative rotation. The exact relative rotation should first be formed with quaternions or matrices.
For a unit error quaternion,
 |
(32) |
A scalar part near zero therefore corresponds to an attitude error near . At that point the choices and are equally valid principal representatives, so the sign can change under arbitrarily small perturbations.
The vector part is parallel to
 |
(33) |
Since
 |
(34) |
the exact error angle is
 |
(35) |
The first order estimate would be
 |
(36) |
Its magnitude is about rad, whereas the exact angle is
rad. The approximation is already noticeably imperfect; for a error the exact quaternion should be retained.
This article is an original synthesis prepared for PhysicsLibrary and intended for release under CC BY-SA 4.0.
| "example of relative attitude and error quaternions" is owned by bloftin.(view preamble)
|
|
| Keywords: |
quaternion, relative attitude, error quaternion, attitude error, multiplicative error, small angle approximation, exercises, worked solutions |
This object's parent.
Cross-references: covariance, identity, magnitude, matrix, norm, vector, error quaternion, scalar, quaternions, section, relative attitude and error quaternions
This is version 1 of example of relative attitude and error quaternions, born on 2026-08-24.
Object id is 1108, canonical name is ExampleOfRelativeAttitudeAndErrorQuaternions.
Accessed 11 times total.
Classification:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pending Errata and Addenda
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|