Skip to main content
sven
Inspiring
May 17, 2013

Positional tracking calibration

I'm still hopeful regarding the idea of approximating positional tracking for scenarios with limited mobility (e.g. the users sitting on a chair) with the accelerometers inside the rift tracker.

I think it may be worthwhile to capture real positional data recorded by a different system (Razer Hydra, MS Kinect or PS Move) and correlate it with the readings from the sensor.

Do you think this is worthwhile? Has anyone tried it?

    74 replies

    Show previous replies
    Tgaud
    Up and Coming
    May 22, 2013
    The above RF (Radio Frequency) Position Tracking System uses UWB (Ultra-Wide Band / Ultra-wideband) wireless.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-wideband

    UWB is similar to spread spectrum, and unlike WiFi and Bluetooth (which is narrowband) it use a large portion of the radio spectrum and communications transmit in frequency ranges which does not interfere with conventional narrowband and carrier wave used in the same frequency band.

    UWB has traditional applications in non-cooperative radar imaging so is perfect for small scale position tracking.
    geekmaster
    Up and Coming
    May 22, 2013
    "Tgaud" wrote:
    why are you telling BS ?

    If you only want SHORT RANGE, you might as well use a Razer Hydra. Unless you are using pre-certified off-the-shelf RF modules with BUILT-IN antennas (certification is for a transmitter and antenna combo), you need certification even for low power equipment (to prove it is low-power). FCC Part 15 requires certification for commercial equipment. Even most non-RF equipment that can generate RF accidentally (most digital equipment) needs FCC certification before it can be sold.

    Yes, I know about UWB. I studied it decades ago when it was still theoretical (I am a licensed radio operator). I own UWB equipment.

    I have grown very weary of your posts (here and elsewhere). Such negativity is a huge psychic energy sink...
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
    Tgaud
    Up and Coming
    May 22, 2013
    it does'nt change the fact that i'm right.
    You can make position tracking inside the range of a room, without having to purchase any FCC licence.

    You can achieve THIS VIDEO :
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=mYyFUQbWC1E

    without any licence, and that's all we want.


    Thats all, thanks.
    Tgaud
    Up and Coming
    May 22, 2013
    "geekmaster" wrote:
    "Tgaud" wrote:
    why are you telling BS ?

    TROLL!!!

    If you only want SHORT RANGE, you might as well use a Razer Hydra. Unless you are using pre-certified off-the-shelf RF modules with BUILT-IN antennas (certification is for a transmitter and antenna combo), you need certification even for low power equipment (to prove it is low-power). FCC Part 15 requires certification for commercial equipment. Even most non-RF equipment that can generate RF accidentally (most digital equipment) needs FCC certification before it can be sold.

    Yes, I know about UWB. I studied it decades ago when it was still theoretical (I am a licensed radio operator). I own UWB equipment.

    I have grown very weary of your posts (here and elsewhere). Such negativity is a huge psychic energy sink...


    when I fart in my bed, if i dont know if it can generate radiofrequency, do I need a FCC certification too ?
    look the wikipedia link, they tell you dont need any certification, thats all.
    geekmaster
    Up and Coming
    May 22, 2013
    "Tgaud" wrote:
    it does'nt change the fact that i'm right.
    You can make position tracking inside the range of a room, without having to purchase any FCC licence.

    Thats all, thanks.

    Only if you use modules that have already been FCC certified (with certain DIY hobbiest exceptions for electronic components and modules).

    Your definition of "right" is very limited, and "not right" in the broader sense...
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
    geekmaster
    Up and Coming
    May 22, 2013
    "Tgaud" wrote:
    when I fart in my bed, if i dont know if it can generate radiofrequency, do I need a FCC certification too ?

    That depends on whether you need to wipe your behind and wash your sheets after you fart, I suppose...

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
    geekmaster
    Up and Coming
    May 22, 2013
    You started pushing RF position tracking on your VERY FIRST post here:
    "At,
    I'm not convinced about PPT by optical solution. ... Imo, the best is magnetical (if your close to your computer, like on a chair)
    Or RadioFrequency. (like there is some prototype in another topic).

    Are you the same Tgaud who trolls other forums, leaving a trail of pissed-off people behind you?
    "At Tgaud convinced that developers are complete idiots with no clue what they are doing.

    Google Translate version (from French):
    "At
    If so, you can cross another site off your "To Be Trolled" list...

    Although, you do have some useful posts here and at other sites, so you seem to have intermittent anti-social behavior. Perhaps you have an agenda, or an "    axe to grind", but I do not know what your problem is. Not interested really. I just wish it would go away...
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
    geekmaster
    Up and Coming
    May 22, 2013
    @Tgaud: When you challenge the claims of others, and especially when you call them B.S., you REALLY SHOULD supply some supporting evidence to justify your claims. You do not though, so others would be justified in calling many of your posts B.S., really.

    In my case, you seem to disagree with (from a lack of understanding on your part) the FCC certification requirements. I will provide a link so you can educate yourself (IF you would even consider such a thing):

    UNDERSTANDING THE FCC REGULATIONS FOR COMPUTERS AND OTHER DIGITAL DEVICES:
    http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet62/oet62rev.pdf

    Your attempts to discourage my efforts will not succeed here, although your attempts to annoy others here and at other forums seems to be somewhat effective...
    :(
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
    geekmaster
    Up and Coming
    May 22, 2013
    "Tgaud" wrote:
    it does'nt change the fact that i'm right.
    You can make position tracking inside the range of a room, without having to purchase any FCC licence.

    You can achieve THIS VIDEO :
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=mYyFUQbWC1E

    without any licence, and that's all we want.

    Thats all, thanks.

    You can make it, but you cannot sell it. And you can only use it if it does not violate FCC regulations (even if you are ignorant of them, which seems to be the case here). Like I said, you need FCC CERTIFICATION. You seem to prefer to use the term "license", which is not correct in this case.

    You need FCC certification (or to use an FCC certified transmitter module AND antenna COMBINATION) to market such radio transmitter technology in the USA. Other countries have similar requirement. Changing the antenna requires recertification. At the very least, even with pre-certified components, you need an FCC approval sticker to affix to a visible location on the outside of your product enclosure. Even the Oculus Rift DK has such a sticker on the bottom of its controller:


    And if you need more proof, read this:
    "STFU, and stop spreading your B.S. badittude.
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
    edzieba
    Up and Coming
    May 22, 2013
    Ignoring the childish name-calling...
    "geekmaster" wrote:
    Positional gesture recognition should be quite easy for users to adapt to, I think. Certainly better than ignoring head movements, as we do now.
    I'm not convinced this is true. In the case of head orientation, no tracking at all IS better than sub-par tracking. With no tracking things work reasonable well, though somewhat boring without the ability to look around. But with bad tracking, any movement you make is nauseating. You can either stay still and essentially have no tracking (except it's hard to really keep your head still), or look around a quickly feel ill. Same with positional tracking: if the latency is not low enough, and the precision and accuracy high enough, then you will feel more nauseous from the vision/motion mismatch than having no tracking and just using the basic head-neck model (and keeping your torso level).
    Show more replies
    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement