New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

LSM9DS1 vs. MPU-9250 vs. BMX055 #6

Open
maziarzamani opened this Issue May 15, 2015 · 71 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
@maziarzamani

maziarzamani commented May 15, 2015

Hi.

I was wondering if you had made any comparison on these 3 chips, especially in terms of the magnetometer, which has been a big problem for me on the Invensense in terms of error.

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner May 15, 2015

Owner

I am in the process of doing just that between the MAX2110X (no magnetometer), MPU9250, LSM9DS0, and BMX055. I will eventually get around to testing the LSM9DS1 and AK9912, et al. but I am starting detailed comparison testing with the four integrated motion sensors listed above.

I don't know what kind of error you are getting but my experience with the AK8963A embedded in the MPU9250 is that with proper bias calibration the data are pretty good. I have also had no problem with the LSM9DSX magnetometers nor the BMX055 but the latter is an odd duck in that the data are magnetic sense data plus a Hall resistance and the magnetic field has to be constructed out of these in software. Still, the resulting data seem OK. All qualitative. I will do quantitative comparisons in the next few weeks of accel, gyro, and mag as well as testing the different data inputs on the resulting open source sensor fusion quaternions, etc.

Right now I can tell you the MPU6500 (accel/gyro in the MPU9250) accelerometer has much lower jitter than the BMX055 accelerometer. I can't say much about the magnetometer relative performance yet but I would ask if your problem with the MPU9250 mag is that you have neglected the bias calibration; this will produce very bad results in any fusion solution.

Owner

kriswiner commented May 15, 2015

I am in the process of doing just that between the MAX2110X (no magnetometer), MPU9250, LSM9DS0, and BMX055. I will eventually get around to testing the LSM9DS1 and AK9912, et al. but I am starting detailed comparison testing with the four integrated motion sensors listed above.

I don't know what kind of error you are getting but my experience with the AK8963A embedded in the MPU9250 is that with proper bias calibration the data are pretty good. I have also had no problem with the LSM9DSX magnetometers nor the BMX055 but the latter is an odd duck in that the data are magnetic sense data plus a Hall resistance and the magnetic field has to be constructed out of these in software. Still, the resulting data seem OK. All qualitative. I will do quantitative comparisons in the next few weeks of accel, gyro, and mag as well as testing the different data inputs on the resulting open source sensor fusion quaternions, etc.

Right now I can tell you the MPU6500 (accel/gyro in the MPU9250) accelerometer has much lower jitter than the BMX055 accelerometer. I can't say much about the magnetometer relative performance yet but I would ask if your problem with the MPU9250 mag is that you have neglected the bias calibration; this will produce very bad results in any fusion solution.

@kriswiner kriswiner closed this May 15, 2015

@kriswiner kriswiner reopened this May 15, 2015

@maziarzamani

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@maziarzamani

maziarzamani May 16, 2015

Sounds very exciting. I am not saying that the data is utter garbage, as i do calibrate the compass. But i tend to experience that it is not acting so stable and easily generate messy data in different environments. It could just be a downside of the MEMS technology with magnetometers.

I am trying to find a few reasons to replace the MPU-9250 with a LMS9DS1. I will be using a few hundred of them and looking at the price tag as a initial comparison we are talking 637$ (MPU-9250) vs. 471$ at 100 pieces. It is a quite significant price difference if they are quite equal in terms of performance.

maziarzamani commented May 16, 2015

Sounds very exciting. I am not saying that the data is utter garbage, as i do calibrate the compass. But i tend to experience that it is not acting so stable and easily generate messy data in different environments. It could just be a downside of the MEMS technology with magnetometers.

I am trying to find a few reasons to replace the MPU-9250 with a LMS9DS1. I will be using a few hundred of them and looking at the price tag as a initial comparison we are talking 637$ (MPU-9250) vs. 471$ at 100 pieces. It is a quite significant price difference if they are quite equal in terms of performance.

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner May 16, 2015

Owner

Well, this is a different issue. You can buy (I have) MPU9250s on www.aliexpress.com for ~$5 with free shipping and no sales tax (in US); I would highly recommend "New Hope" as I have bought several things from them many times and the service and quality are very good. The MPU9250 has the advantage in smaller footprint, much simpler design (2 die instead of the four or so in the LSM9DS1) and wider full scale ranges (+/- 16 g). I like ST products generally but in this case, there is no advantage to using the LSM9DS1 over the MPU9250 in my view. The LSM9DS0 might be a competitor for the MPU9250 and I would consider it if I were you. It is larger, a little more difficult to solder mount, but produces very good data. I'll have more quantitative results on this point in a few weeks but the prices are about the same.

Owner

kriswiner commented May 16, 2015

Well, this is a different issue. You can buy (I have) MPU9250s on www.aliexpress.com for ~$5 with free shipping and no sales tax (in US); I would highly recommend "New Hope" as I have bought several things from them many times and the service and quality are very good. The MPU9250 has the advantage in smaller footprint, much simpler design (2 die instead of the four or so in the LSM9DS1) and wider full scale ranges (+/- 16 g). I like ST products generally but in this case, there is no advantage to using the LSM9DS1 over the MPU9250 in my view. The LSM9DS0 might be a competitor for the MPU9250 and I would consider it if I were you. It is larger, a little more difficult to solder mount, but produces very good data. I'll have more quantitative results on this point in a few weeks but the prices are about the same.

@maziarzamani

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@maziarzamani

maziarzamani May 16, 2015

I bought the initial demo boards from aliexpress, but unfortunately i will need to buy them on tray for the next batches i will be making. I have already soldered quite a few of the MPU-9250 and they are literally a pain in the ass to paste in hand (even with a stencil) and solder in a oven without having to do a lot of post-soldering due to solderball formation under the IC, especially due to the thermal pad in the middle of the IC which causes an unwanted spacing. Besides that the chip is ok, but rumors spread that LSM9DS0 is a good replacement. In which aspects would you say that the LSM9DS0 is superior?

maziarzamani commented May 16, 2015

I bought the initial demo boards from aliexpress, but unfortunately i will need to buy them on tray for the next batches i will be making. I have already soldered quite a few of the MPU-9250 and they are literally a pain in the ass to paste in hand (even with a stencil) and solder in a oven without having to do a lot of post-soldering due to solderball formation under the IC, especially due to the thermal pad in the middle of the IC which causes an unwanted spacing. Besides that the chip is ok, but rumors spread that LSM9DS0 is a good replacement. In which aspects would you say that the LSM9DS0 is superior?

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner May 16, 2015

Owner

First of all, the breakout boards offered from www.aliexpress are complete crap, I would never use them especially if they are purple. It is the MPU9250 QFN chips that are the bargain and well worth buying from "New Hope" seller.

I hope you are not soldering the thermal pad. It must remain unconnected electronically. I don't use a metallized pad underneath the QFN package in my designs and neither does Invensense. This is asking for trouble.

I said the LSM9DS0 might be comparable in performance; I haven't finished my quantitative testing yet. But it is bigger, a bit harder to use, and used to be more expensive but I think the price dropped recently so that now they are about the same price. I will just tell you that in our commercial projects we are using the MPU9250 and might switch to the MAX21105 but haven't decided. We are not considering the LSM9DSX currently.

Sounds like your stencil or the application of solder process if faulty if you are having trouble here. I have soldered hundreds of these with little trouble except the occasional solder bridge between pins.

Maybe your landp pad design is the problem?

Owner

kriswiner commented May 16, 2015

First of all, the breakout boards offered from www.aliexpress are complete crap, I would never use them especially if they are purple. It is the MPU9250 QFN chips that are the bargain and well worth buying from "New Hope" seller.

I hope you are not soldering the thermal pad. It must remain unconnected electronically. I don't use a metallized pad underneath the QFN package in my designs and neither does Invensense. This is asking for trouble.

I said the LSM9DS0 might be comparable in performance; I haven't finished my quantitative testing yet. But it is bigger, a bit harder to use, and used to be more expensive but I think the price dropped recently so that now they are about the same price. I will just tell you that in our commercial projects we are using the MPU9250 and might switch to the MAX21105 but haven't decided. We are not considering the LSM9DSX currently.

Sounds like your stencil or the application of solder process if faulty if you are having trouble here. I have soldered hundreds of these with little trouble except the occasional solder bridge between pins.

Maybe your landp pad design is the problem?

@maziarzamani

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@maziarzamani

maziarzamani May 16, 2015

I will check out the seller on AliExpress!

I see what you mean with the thermal pad, i have just notified my HW guy, which has clearly made an huge mistake, thanks for the tip!

MAX21105 seems interesting. Which magnetometer will you pair it with?

maziarzamani commented May 16, 2015

I will check out the seller on AliExpress!

I see what you mean with the thermal pad, i have just notified my HW guy, which has clearly made an huge mistake, thanks for the tip!

MAX21105 seems interesting. Which magnetometer will you pair it with?

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner May 16, 2015

Owner

I plan to test both the AK8963A which I already know fairly well and the newer AK9912. BTW, I like the LIS3MDL mag from ST (I currently pair the MAX21100 with it in my breakout boards for sale at Tindie) so I will be testing this in some detail also. Lot's to do, and so little time!

Owner

kriswiner commented May 16, 2015

I plan to test both the AK8963A which I already know fairly well and the newer AK9912. BTW, I like the LIS3MDL mag from ST (I currently pair the MAX21100 with it in my breakout boards for sale at Tindie) so I will be testing this in some detail also. Lot's to do, and so little time!

@maziarzamani

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@maziarzamani

maziarzamani Jun 13, 2015

I am looking forward to see your results! 👍

maziarzamani commented Jun 13, 2015

I am looking forward to see your results! 👍

@jheissjr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jheissjr

jheissjr Oct 4, 2015

Kris, how is testing? Are you looking at the AK8963A, AK9912, LIS3MDL?

jheissjr commented Oct 4, 2015

Kris, how is testing? Are you looking at the AK8963A, AK9912, LIS3MDL?

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Oct 5, 2015

Owner

Currently I am testing the AK8963C, LIS3MDL and HMC5883L. I am going to add
the HMC5983 since it is the newer Honeywell offering. I also have some
samples of the AK9912 I want to test, just haven't gotten there yet.

So far I am impressed with the Honeywell mag but it only has 12-bits
compared to the 16-bits of the others so its apparent stability might just
be due to the lower resolution. The LSM9DS1 has the LIS3MDL embedded in it
and I am testing this 9 DoF solution also. Still have a lot of work to do
before I can come to any conclusions but I am working on it.

One thing I already know is that I don't like the Bosch magnetometer.

Kris

-----Original Message-----
From: jheissjr [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: October 4, 2015 4:21 PM
To: kriswiner/MPU-6050
Cc: Kris Winer
Subject: Re: [MPU-6050] LSM9DS1 vs. MPU-9250 vs. BMX055 (#6)

Kris, how is testing? Are you looking at the AK8963A, AK9912, LIS3MDL?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#6 (comment) .
<https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AGY1qm_jNtUJYMx4W3VrhmEdW8ErwQg7ks5
o4au_gaJpZM4EbfGw.gif>

Owner

kriswiner commented Oct 5, 2015

Currently I am testing the AK8963C, LIS3MDL and HMC5883L. I am going to add
the HMC5983 since it is the newer Honeywell offering. I also have some
samples of the AK9912 I want to test, just haven't gotten there yet.

So far I am impressed with the Honeywell mag but it only has 12-bits
compared to the 16-bits of the others so its apparent stability might just
be due to the lower resolution. The LSM9DS1 has the LIS3MDL embedded in it
and I am testing this 9 DoF solution also. Still have a lot of work to do
before I can come to any conclusions but I am working on it.

One thing I already know is that I don't like the Bosch magnetometer.

Kris

-----Original Message-----
From: jheissjr [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: October 4, 2015 4:21 PM
To: kriswiner/MPU-6050
Cc: Kris Winer
Subject: Re: [MPU-6050] LSM9DS1 vs. MPU-9250 vs. BMX055 (#6)

Kris, how is testing? Are you looking at the AK8963A, AK9912, LIS3MDL?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#6 (comment) .
<https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AGY1qm_jNtUJYMx4W3VrhmEdW8ErwQg7ks5
o4au_gaJpZM4EbfGw.gif>

@jheissjr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jheissjr

jheissjr Oct 5, 2015

What have you seen with the Bosh magnetometer?

jheissjr commented Oct 5, 2015

What have you seen with the Bosh magnetometer?

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Oct 5, 2015

Owner

You can read about the detailed results on the MPU9250 Wiki at my github
site, but bottom line, it is not very easy to calibrate it.

-----Original Message-----
From: jheissjr [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: October 4, 2015 8:32 PM
To: kriswiner/MPU-6050
Cc: Kris Winer
Subject: Re: [MPU-6050] LSM9DS1 vs. MPU-9250 vs. BMX055 (#6)

What have you seen with the Bosh magnetometer?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#6 (comment) .
<https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AGY1qvsJB3IaWD7stvTPoXOiJXzTOSRFks5
o4eaigaJpZM4EbfGw.gif>

Owner

kriswiner commented Oct 5, 2015

You can read about the detailed results on the MPU9250 Wiki at my github
site, but bottom line, it is not very easy to calibrate it.

-----Original Message-----
From: jheissjr [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: October 4, 2015 8:32 PM
To: kriswiner/MPU-6050
Cc: Kris Winer
Subject: Re: [MPU-6050] LSM9DS1 vs. MPU-9250 vs. BMX055 (#6)

What have you seen with the Bosh magnetometer?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#6 (comment) .
<https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AGY1qvsJB3IaWD7stvTPoXOiJXzTOSRFks5
o4eaigaJpZM4EbfGw.gif>

@maziarzamani

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@maziarzamani

maziarzamani Oct 8, 2015

Did you ever have the chance to try out the AK9912?

maziarzamani commented Oct 8, 2015

Did you ever have the chance to try out the AK9912?

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Oct 8, 2015

Owner

Still on my list of things to do, but I did get some samples.

Owner

kriswiner commented Oct 8, 2015

Still on my list of things to do, but I did get some samples.

@jheissjr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jheissjr

jheissjr Oct 11, 2015

I've been reading that Helmholtz coils are used for calibrating magnetometers. Do you have access to a Helmholtz coil for your testing by chance? I wish I did lol. I was also thinking it would be good to wrap the magnetometer in magnetic shielding (like MuMetal) to provide a quiet environment for taking noise measurements

jheissjr commented Oct 11, 2015

I've been reading that Helmholtz coils are used for calibrating magnetometers. Do you have access to a Helmholtz coil for your testing by chance? I wish I did lol. I was also thinking it would be good to wrap the magnetometer in magnetic shielding (like MuMetal) to provide a quiet environment for taking noise measurements

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Oct 11, 2015

Owner

I don't have Helmholtz coils or Mu-metal but I don't think they are
necessary for the kind of testing relevant for characterizing the quality of
sensor fusion solutions, which is my interest. I have been using Honeywell's
HMC5883 mag lately and I find it is pretty stable compared to the AK and ST
mags. This is partly due to the fact that Honeywell's mags (the newest
HMC5983 too) use a 12-bit ADC instead of a 16-bit one, but their
construction is unique and I am beginning to think superior to standard MEMS
Hall sensors. I need to do more testing, but I am hopeful the HMC5983 will
provide the kind of sensor fusion solution capable of +/- 2 degree heading
accuracy.

-----Original Message-----
From: jheissjr [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: October 10, 2015 7:38 PM
To: kriswiner/MPU-6050
Cc: Kris Winer
Subject: Re: [MPU-6050] LSM9DS1 vs. MPU-9250 vs. BMX055 (#6)

I've been reading that Helmholtz coils are used for calibrating
magnetometers. Do you have access to a Helmholtz coil for your testing by
chance? I wish I did lol. I was also thinking it would be good to wrap the
magnetometer in magnetic shielding (like MuMetal) for taking noise
measurements to provide a quite environment.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#6 (comment) .
<https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AGY1qpA9RPy3cU6M7oUtSqCrWVyCjrftks5
o6cMegaJpZM4EbfGw.gif>

Owner

kriswiner commented Oct 11, 2015

I don't have Helmholtz coils or Mu-metal but I don't think they are
necessary for the kind of testing relevant for characterizing the quality of
sensor fusion solutions, which is my interest. I have been using Honeywell's
HMC5883 mag lately and I find it is pretty stable compared to the AK and ST
mags. This is partly due to the fact that Honeywell's mags (the newest
HMC5983 too) use a 12-bit ADC instead of a 16-bit one, but their
construction is unique and I am beginning to think superior to standard MEMS
Hall sensors. I need to do more testing, but I am hopeful the HMC5983 will
provide the kind of sensor fusion solution capable of +/- 2 degree heading
accuracy.

-----Original Message-----
From: jheissjr [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: October 10, 2015 7:38 PM
To: kriswiner/MPU-6050
Cc: Kris Winer
Subject: Re: [MPU-6050] LSM9DS1 vs. MPU-9250 vs. BMX055 (#6)

I've been reading that Helmholtz coils are used for calibrating
magnetometers. Do you have access to a Helmholtz coil for your testing by
chance? I wish I did lol. I was also thinking it would be good to wrap the
magnetometer in magnetic shielding (like MuMetal) for taking noise
measurements to provide a quite environment.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#6 (comment) .
<https://github.com/notifications/beacon/AGY1qpA9RPy3cU6M7oUtSqCrWVyCjrftks5
o6cMegaJpZM4EbfGw.gif>

@sarwadenj

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@sarwadenj

sarwadenj Jan 23, 2017

@kriswiner,@maziarzamani have you obtained quantitative results for the MPU9250 and LSM9DS1? If so please link me to them. Regarding the MPU9250, why do you think it is not very easy to calibrate?
Which one of these will you recommend for use in Miniature Aerial Vehicles?
Thank you.

sarwadenj commented Jan 23, 2017

@kriswiner,@maziarzamani have you obtained quantitative results for the MPU9250 and LSM9DS1? If so please link me to them. Regarding the MPU9250, why do you think it is not very easy to calibrate?
Which one of these will you recommend for use in Miniature Aerial Vehicles?
Thank you.

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Jan 23, 2017

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Jan 23, 2017

@cavetronic

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@cavetronic

cavetronic Mar 8, 2017

Hi Kris,
How about Your test? Is it worth (in the meaning of data quality - jiggling, acccuracy and sensivity) to replace LSM9DS0 with MPU9250? Or there is any other alternative which gives the good readings?
Bests!
Adam

cavetronic commented Mar 8, 2017

Hi Kris,
How about Your test? Is it worth (in the meaning of data quality - jiggling, acccuracy and sensivity) to replace LSM9DS0 with MPU9250? Or there is any other alternative which gives the good readings?
Bests!
Adam

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Mar 8, 2017

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Mar 8, 2017

@cavetronic

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@cavetronic

cavetronic Mar 9, 2017

Thank You so much!

cavetronic commented Mar 9, 2017

Thank You so much!

@mik00

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mik00

mik00 May 19, 2017

Hi Kris,

Your Bakeoff is a great bit of work Kris. Practical, to the point, and just the right amount of detail. Exactly what I wanted to know. Thanks.

Well, perhaps there is one other thing I'd like to know...

I'm currently using the MPU9250 for my eldercare activity sensor. I need to do some rather specialised signal processing for my app, which at present has to be done on my host - an M4. I notice that it is claimed that one can write custom signal processing code to embed in the BMX which is an M0 I think.

Do you have any comment or experience on the feasibility/ease/benefits of that please?

Anyone else out there have an opinion.?

mik00 commented May 19, 2017

Hi Kris,

Your Bakeoff is a great bit of work Kris. Practical, to the point, and just the right amount of detail. Exactly what I wanted to know. Thanks.

Well, perhaps there is one other thing I'd like to know...

I'm currently using the MPU9250 for my eldercare activity sensor. I need to do some rather specialised signal processing for my app, which at present has to be done on my host - an M4. I notice that it is claimed that one can write custom signal processing code to embed in the BMX which is an M0 I think.

Do you have any comment or experience on the feasibility/ease/benefits of that please?

Anyone else out there have an opinion.?

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner May 19, 2017

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented May 19, 2017

@mik00

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mik00

mik00 May 19, 2017

Thanks so much for the swift response. My head is spinning with all the different Bosch variants.
Are you connected with Pesky at all? I'd like to ask more questions about the EM7180, but I don't want to clog up this thread.

mik00 commented May 19, 2017

Thanks so much for the swift response. My head is spinning with all the different Bosch variants.
Are you connected with Pesky at all? I'd like to ask more questions about the EM7180, but I don't want to clog up this thread.

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner May 19, 2017

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented May 19, 2017

@saedelman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@saedelman

saedelman Jul 16, 2017

@kriswiner - Great information. Can you comment on the quality of the data from the MPU9250 when forward motion of the device is in excess of 10mph? I am currently experimenting with the BNO055 in an aviation application and it is utterly useless with even the slightest forward speed. This is not just drift, all of the values start producing non-sensical and erratic values. Do you have any data to suggest that the MPU9250 would fare better?

saedelman commented Jul 16, 2017

@kriswiner - Great information. Can you comment on the quality of the data from the MPU9250 when forward motion of the device is in excess of 10mph? I am currently experimenting with the BNO055 in an aviation application and it is utterly useless with even the slightest forward speed. This is not just drift, all of the values start producing non-sensical and erratic values. Do you have any data to suggest that the MPU9250 would fare better?

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Jul 16, 2017

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Jul 16, 2017

@saedelman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@saedelman

saedelman Jul 16, 2017

@kriswiner - Thanks for your comments. The impression I have is that their fusion model is optimized for slow movements only (e.g. applications for VR headsets, etc.). Perhaps, an interesting experiment would be to conduct the tests you previously did for the bakeoff using your 4 different types of MEMS sensors while in a moving vehicle (fixed speed and with acceleration). There is very little data available on how these sensors behave with acceleration/deceleration present.

saedelman commented Jul 16, 2017

@kriswiner - Thanks for your comments. The impression I have is that their fusion model is optimized for slow movements only (e.g. applications for VR headsets, etc.). Perhaps, an interesting experiment would be to conduct the tests you previously did for the bakeoff using your 4 different types of MEMS sensors while in a moving vehicle (fixed speed and with acceleration). There is very little data available on how these sensors behave with acceleration/deceleration present.

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Jul 16, 2017

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Jul 16, 2017

@JesusIslam

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@JesusIslam

JesusIslam Aug 1, 2017

@kriswiner Where do you buy EM7180? I couldn't find it anywhere.

JesusIslam commented Aug 1, 2017

@kriswiner Where do you buy EM7180? I couldn't find it anywhere.

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Aug 1, 2017

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Aug 1, 2017

@saedelman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@saedelman

saedelman Oct 12, 2017

@kriswiner - I am looking more closely at the MPU9250 as a replacement for the BNO055 in our project. It appears that the MPU9250 provides a fusion solution through its onboard DMP processor. Why do you still use the EM7180 (which is short of impossible to source in NA) with the MPU9250? Isn't the EM7180 redundant in this case? What am I missing?

saedelman commented Oct 12, 2017

@kriswiner - I am looking more closely at the MPU9250 as a replacement for the BNO055 in our project. It appears that the MPU9250 provides a fusion solution through its onboard DMP processor. Why do you still use the EM7180 (which is short of impossible to source in NA) with the MPU9250? Isn't the EM7180 redundant in this case? What am I missing?

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Oct 12, 2017

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Oct 12, 2017

@RaffaeleMineo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@RaffaeleMineo

RaffaeleMineo Nov 28, 2017

Hi Mr. Winer,
I follow you since 1 year ago.
Have you new information about EM7180 +LSM6DSM+LIS2MDL?
Perhaps I have a question: can the madgwich filter be the best solution if it is implemented at very high rate 20khz (STM32F4 employed at firmware level), or in your study the best limit remains 3° accuracy?
Thanks in advance

RaffaeleMineo commented Nov 28, 2017

Hi Mr. Winer,
I follow you since 1 year ago.
Have you new information about EM7180 +LSM6DSM+LIS2MDL?
Perhaps I have a question: can the madgwich filter be the best solution if it is implemented at very high rate 20khz (STM32F4 employed at firmware level), or in your study the best limit remains 3° accuracy?
Thanks in advance

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Nov 28, 2017

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Nov 28, 2017

@jheissjr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jheissjr

jheissjr Nov 28, 2017

Which ST sensor/IC will be on the ST sensor board? I'm a little confused about the EM7180, is it an ASIC, micro with custom software?

jheissjr commented Nov 28, 2017

Which ST sensor/IC will be on the ST sensor board? I'm a little confused about the EM7180, is it an ASIC, micro with custom software?

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Nov 28, 2017

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Nov 28, 2017

@saedelman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@saedelman

saedelman Nov 29, 2017

Interesting. Wouldn't having the magnetometer physically offset from the XY axis of the accel/gyro chip introduce an error in the fusion solution? I suppose you could have the accel/gyro on one side of the board and the mag on the other to minimize this, but that does not appear to be the case with the board you referenced on Tindie. I suppose you could compensate for this in the Madgwick solution, but how exactly?

saedelman commented Nov 29, 2017

Interesting. Wouldn't having the magnetometer physically offset from the XY axis of the accel/gyro chip introduce an error in the fusion solution? I suppose you could have the accel/gyro on one side of the board and the mag on the other to minimize this, but that does not appear to be the case with the board you referenced on Tindie. I suppose you could compensate for this in the Madgwick solution, but how exactly?

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Nov 29, 2017

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Nov 29, 2017

@carbonadam

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@carbonadam

carbonadam Jan 15, 2018

After trying out the bno055 and not getting anything reliable I am going to order one of your sensor fusion boards as I really like that the fusion seems to output something I can use:) At the moment I am working on a swarm robot project that I was planning on using a sensor like this one in each robot(100 in total) but it needs to be fairly robust with the calibration as I dont want to wave a 100 robots in the air everyday in figure 8s...I will go insane. But just for arguments sake how well do you think running the fusion software on a esp32 would work using the MPU9250 in comparison to the sensor fusion module you make?

carbonadam commented Jan 15, 2018

After trying out the bno055 and not getting anything reliable I am going to order one of your sensor fusion boards as I really like that the fusion seems to output something I can use:) At the moment I am working on a swarm robot project that I was planning on using a sensor like this one in each robot(100 in total) but it needs to be fairly robust with the calibration as I dont want to wave a 100 robots in the air everyday in figure 8s...I will go insane. But just for arguments sake how well do you think running the fusion software on a esp32 would work using the MPU9250 in comparison to the sensor fusion module you make?

@RaffaeleMineo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@RaffaeleMineo

RaffaeleMineo Jan 15, 2018

Hi Mr. Winer. How about ST board with EM7180? When do you sell this?

RaffaeleMineo commented Jan 15, 2018

Hi Mr. Winer. How about ST board with EM7180? When do you sell this?

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Jan 15, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Jan 15, 2018

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Jan 15, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Jan 15, 2018

@Benik3

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Benik3

Benik3 Apr 14, 2018

Hello.
Didn't you check BNO080?
It looks pretty powerful and accurate. It's able to calculate full 9DOF on the chip... (what I get MPU9250 is capable only to do 6DoF - without magnetometer).

Benik3 commented Apr 14, 2018

Hello.
Didn't you check BNO080?
It looks pretty powerful and accurate. It's able to calculate full 9DOF on the chip... (what I get MPU9250 is capable only to do 6DoF - without magnetometer).

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Apr 14, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Apr 14, 2018

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Apr 14, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Apr 14, 2018

@Benik3

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Benik3

Benik3 Apr 14, 2018

OK, thank you :)

Benik3 commented Apr 14, 2018

OK, thank you :)

@saedelman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@saedelman

saedelman Apr 14, 2018

We've been testing the BNO055 9DOF sensor as part of an aviation data logger and even with calibration, the fusion solution gets completely hammered after any acceleration or moderate g-maneuvers (1.1-2g). It appears to us that the BNO055 is primarily dimensioned for use in VR headsets where the acceleration is contained. See an example below. I can assure you, we were not actually flying sideways.

We're going to be spinning a new board with the TDK Invensense ICM-20948 (replacement for MPU9250) and the EM7180, now that we have identified CDIWEB as a North American supplier of this elusive part (MOQ 4000) and we'll see how it holds up under the same conditions.

image

saedelman commented Apr 14, 2018

We've been testing the BNO055 9DOF sensor as part of an aviation data logger and even with calibration, the fusion solution gets completely hammered after any acceleration or moderate g-maneuvers (1.1-2g). It appears to us that the BNO055 is primarily dimensioned for use in VR headsets where the acceleration is contained. See an example below. I can assure you, we were not actually flying sideways.

We're going to be spinning a new board with the TDK Invensense ICM-20948 (replacement for MPU9250) and the EM7180, now that we have identified CDIWEB as a North American supplier of this elusive part (MOQ 4000) and we'll see how it holds up under the same conditions.

image

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Apr 14, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Apr 14, 2018

@saedelman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@saedelman

saedelman Apr 14, 2018

@kriswiner - Thank you, I'll get them to provide a quote.

saedelman commented Apr 14, 2018

@kriswiner - Thank you, I'll get them to provide a quote.

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Apr 14, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Apr 14, 2018

@Benik3

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Benik3

Benik3 Apr 14, 2018

The ICM-20948 is almost the same as MPU9250 what I see.
Just lower power, magnetometer 16bit (vs 14bit) and SPI up to 7MHz (vs 1MHz).

Benik3 commented Apr 14, 2018

The ICM-20948 is almost the same as MPU9250 what I see.
Just lower power, magnetometer 16bit (vs 14bit) and SPI up to 7MHz (vs 1MHz).

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Apr 14, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Apr 14, 2018

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Apr 14, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Apr 14, 2018

@Benik3

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Benik3

Benik3 Apr 14, 2018

Yes. I just wouldn't say that it's replacement of MPU9250. It's just for another section of market (IoT etc.)...

Benik3 commented Apr 14, 2018

Yes. I just wouldn't say that it's replacement of MPU9250. It's just for another section of market (IoT etc.)...

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Apr 14, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Apr 14, 2018

@JesusIslam

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@JesusIslam

JesusIslam Apr 17, 2018

@kriswiner

You can get the EM7180 in any quantity from Omnipro, ask for Tim Lydia.

Do they sell board or just the chip?

JesusIslam commented Apr 17, 2018

@kriswiner

You can get the EM7180 in any quantity from Omnipro, ask for Tim Lydia.

Do they sell board or just the chip?

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Apr 17, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Apr 17, 2018

@laufetc

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@laufetc

laufetc Apr 17, 2018

laufetc commented Apr 17, 2018

@burnhamd

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@burnhamd

burnhamd May 8, 2018

Hey Kris, based on your suggestions I am using the 9250 for my application. Any idea how the performance of the Motion library (MPL) invensense provides compares in accuracy to the EM7180?
I've been doing some testing with the MPL and found that the 6-axis is pretty good, but the heading is pretty variable with +- 4 degrees standard deviation. That is after using their built in calibration.

burnhamd commented May 8, 2018

Hey Kris, based on your suggestions I am using the 9250 for my application. Any idea how the performance of the Motion library (MPL) invensense provides compares in accuracy to the EM7180?
I've been doing some testing with the MPL and found that the 6-axis is pretty good, but the heading is pretty variable with +- 4 degrees standard deviation. That is after using their built in calibration.

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner May 8, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented May 8, 2018

@saedelman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@saedelman

saedelman May 8, 2018

saedelman commented May 8, 2018

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner May 8, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented May 8, 2018

@saedelman

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@saedelman

saedelman May 8, 2018

saedelman commented May 8, 2018

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner May 8, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented May 8, 2018

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner May 9, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented May 9, 2018

@Batilan

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Batilan

Batilan May 19, 2018

Hi Kris,

Great topic and great linked articles! Any chance you will include the STM IIS2MDC magnetometer in your research? However I guess you have more than enough sensors to compare already :-). Probably you already saw this nice overview of STM magnetometers.

Batilan commented May 19, 2018

Hi Kris,

Great topic and great linked articles! Any chance you will include the STM IIS2MDC magnetometer in your research? However I guess you have more than enough sensors to compare already :-). Probably you already saw this nice overview of STM magnetometers.

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner May 19, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented May 19, 2018

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner May 19, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented May 19, 2018

@CZEMacLeod

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@CZEMacLeod

CZEMacLeod Jul 30, 2018

@kriswiner I notice earlier in this thread you were discussing the LIS3MDL and later then go with the LIS2MDL. Do you have any discussion on the differences and why you picked the 2 vs. the 3? I currently have a GPS board with the LIS3MDL and want to understand what limitations I may encounter and if I should try and change chip... Unfortunately they don't seem to be pin compatible so I can't easily switch chip and investigate myself just now.

CZEMacLeod commented Jul 30, 2018

@kriswiner I notice earlier in this thread you were discussing the LIS3MDL and later then go with the LIS2MDL. Do you have any discussion on the differences and why you picked the 2 vs. the 3? I currently have a GPS board with the LIS3MDL and want to understand what limitations I may encounter and if I should try and change chip... Unfortunately they don't seem to be pin compatible so I can't easily switch chip and investigate myself just now.

@kriswiner

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kriswiner

kriswiner Jul 30, 2018

Owner
Owner

kriswiner commented Jul 30, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment