paparazzi-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Paparazzi-devel] AHRS over SPI on Tiny


From: David Conger
Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] AHRS over SPI on Tiny
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 15:59:06 -0700 (PDT)

Hello, Thank you, this is all good information.

I understand the issue with using the IMU is not documentation related. I am trying which is why I am asking so many questions today. I hope everyone doesn't mind my questions while I try different things. As always I will add what I learn to the Wiki where I see a void.

Am I correct then in staying that those Paparazzi Fixed Wing projects flying with IMU are relying on the AHRS on the IMU and feeding estimator with the results? I guess OSAM uses an IMU fed to a Gumstix which runs some other code to get PHI, PSI, THETA then feed that into estimator?

I'm really hoping that if estimator can simply be directly fed PHI, PSI, THETA from whatever source then you can fly. So maybe
1) Overo Water (I already have) +
2) Booz IMU (I already have) +
3) Some code ((I do not have)
Might produce good PHI, PSI, THETA to feed estimator that will fly? I still lack the understanding if estimator if given good PHI, PSI, THETA can fly or is it more complex.

Again please excuse my ignorance on these things. I really have valued your time to reply so far everyone.

Regards,
David Conger
Onefastdaddy
001-858-775-3613
Web: http://www.onefastdaddy.com
email: address@hidden




On Sep 02, 2010, at 11:49 AM, "Prof. Dr.-Ing. Heinrich Warmers" <address@hidden> wrote:

Hello,
The sensors used by Booz and HB-Autopilot (ADXRS610)  have higher vibration resistance  and lower drifts.
You can also use Spakfun PCBs with the adxRS610 and glue them together to a cube . But this is expensive about 180 Euros.
The first sensors  LISY300AL  used by the diydrohnes project had poor vibrations resistance.
The Razor IMU has new sensors with better performance. Also the new IMUSENSE sensors have good performances to fly quadcopters and
normal planes. If you want to fly with  MEMS you must look that you have fully balanced the drive train (propellers).
Sometimes it is necessary to damp vibrations by the use of rubber mounts or foam.

The advertange of the DCM algorithm introduced by William Premerlani and Paul Bizard is that they also take the centrifugal forces into account in
correcting the  gyro drift and to correct the orthogonallity of the DCM. Both are scientists and no hobbyist and wrote easy to understand documents  and take matlab simulations before going to the C code. Also a EKF was implemented.

If very closer circles are flown with high speed the range of the acceleration sensors has to be extended.
Booz and HB-Autopilot can measure up to 5g. The new  HB autopilot  can measure  up to 6g. The RazzorIMU can measure up to 3g.
There is no  limitation  on the  speed.
 
The diydrohens project works first as paparazzi  wiht IR-Sensors and  AVR processors.  The community is very active:
normal planes, quadrocopters and helicopters.
Most of the hardware is sealed by Sparkfun.
You can by a IMU with processor for 99$  with  the same algorithms.
http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/product_info.php?products_id=9956
In the actual version 1.7  also pressure  measurement and magnetometer signals  are taken into account.
It is also possible to use this system with the paparazzi Towg. There is a comment in the paparazzi  wiki..

Regards
Heinrich









David Conger schrieb:
Hello,

Thank you CHristophe (and Dr. Warmers). This explanation below raises another question then. How are the UAV Devboard guys able to do it? Here is the link to the UAV Dev Board main page: http://code.google.com/p/gentlenav/wiki/MatrixPilot

One of their users flies a FunJet > 100mph, not in a straight line only, quite well with the DCM code. How is this possible from a project so new by someone with no experience with UAV before?

It should be noted that the code for the DIY is a simpler version of the orig. code from the UAV Devboard so maybe better results would come from code more like the UAV Devboard and not the DIY IMU. 

I want to help, try out code, fly, ask programmers I work with to take a look... but I don't want to use DIY code and still use IR to fly fixed wing. I also can not afford a 2000.00 IMU. To me Booz is fine because  anyone can assemble one or have one assembled from available plans or it can be purchased for about the same price as a VT100. I do not get the feeling having a 100.00 IMU will make all the difference. It's the lack of actually being able to do it or that it's not widely done with any IMU that seems to get the complaints from people I interact with. They simply point to the UAV Devboard and DIY for the examples.

-David

On Sep 1, 2010, at 11:34 PM, Christophe De Wagter wrote:

Hello,

The AHRS works fine as long as there are no long-lasting kinematic accelerations. An airplane however does accelerate very often for a long time: for instance when making something as simple as a turn. This is a big problem for "Inertial/Magnetic-Only" AHRS. For quadrotors, as long as you hover or move slowly and always keep your nose in the same direction, these sensors are sufficient. For aircraft you NEED to compensate for kinematic accelerations. This is why either airspeed of GPS is required in order to make the filter stay within the +/-10 degree error range like thermopiles. 

The code in the HW branch uses this type of filter as was written by diydrones. 

If the Raisor IMU can be converted to accept GPS data, it could do the full computation. Once reliable attitude data is available, like you say: "it can simply be copied to the estimator variables" 

If you run for instance the XSens Mti-G Module (with internal GPS and barometer for kinematic conpensations), that is exactly what happens. 


-Christophe


On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 8:16 AM, David Conger <address@hidden> wrote:
Hello,

I took a look at the HW branch code today. Am I correct when I think the HW code in razor_imu is bypassing the DCM code on the Razor and just using the ADC outputs and then calculating the Euler Angles in the Autopilot. Then feeding them to estimator. 

Since the Razor is an AHRS already can't the outputs from the AHRS just be fed to estimator directly? Just over SPI feel the Euler Angles output into:
From estimator.c 
/* attitude in radian */
float estimator_phi;
float estimator_psi;
float estimator_theta;

I also see the wiring diagram in the HR branch shows IR sensors are still used alongside the Razor IMU. Is this because it's difficult to remove the IR code? 

-David

On Sep 1, 2010, at 6:30 AM, address@hidden wrote:

Germar, Have a look at the post by Prof. Dr.-Ing. Heinrich Warmers on 23 July 2010.
He has tested a low cost Sparkfun IMU ( RAZZOR IMU 6DOF Razor - Ultra-Thin IMU) with the paparazzi hardware.

From: address@hidden [mailto:paparazzi-devel-bounces+mark.griffin=itu.int@nongnu.org] On Behalf Of David Carlson
Sent: Wednesday, 1 September 2010 1:53 PM
To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] AHRS over SPI on Tiny

Contact hwarm or check out his branch in svn.  I believe they have this IMU working with the autopilot already.

Buzz

On 09/01/2010 09:31 AM, Germar Walter wrote:
Hi,

We are building a fixedwing Aircraft with tiny board.
We want to replace the Thermopiles with a AHRS System. We have purchased the Sparkfun9DOF Razor IMU. On the IMU we are directly calculating eulerian angles via the code provided by http://code.google.com/p/sf9domahrs/source/list.
We have activated the SPI interface on the board to communicate with the paparazzi
Has anybody done something similar or knows how to use the angles for roll and pitch for stbilization? The code from the gyro.c only takes analogue measurements, but since We have a digital interface we don't want to convert to analogue just to convert back on the paparazzi.

cheers
Germar

 
 
_______________________________________________
Paparazzi-devel mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
  

_______________________________________________
Paparazzi-devel mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel


_______________________________________________
Paparazzi-devel mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel


_______________________________________________
Paparazzi-devel mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel


_______________________________________________ Paparazzi-devel mailing list address@hidden http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
_______________________________________________
Paparazzi-devel mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]