Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Change in altitude handling?

[Stephen L Hulme]

Hi Gautier

 

 

Thank you very much.

 

I just wished to make sure I had the defines more or less correct, before my next test flight.

 

Nonetheless, is it appropriate to use;   

<define name="SONAR_UPDATE_ON_AGL" value="TRUE"/>

when there is no appropriate SRTM data available.

 

I refer to Felix’s recent comment directed to Kadir here: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/paparazzi-devel/2014-03/msg00251.html

 

Regards

 

Stephen

 

 

On March 28, 2014 5:10 AM, Gautier Hattenberger wrote:

Hi,

I only flew the ardrone two times in autonomous mode (last week), so I can't really pretend that I recommend my settings, but if you want to compare with the default setttings, I'm attaching my airframe file. The link below shows the result of the demo flight I made with it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2SUFWoKBKw

Gautier

2014-03-27 6:24 GMT+01:00 Stephen L Hulme <address@hidden>:

Hi Gautier

You may have noticed I posted a similar Ardrone2 issue: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/paparazzi-devel/2014-03/msg00209.html

I was using the latest master repo Sonar defines:

<section name="INS" prefix="INS_">
  <define name="SONAR_SENS" value="0.00034"/>
  <define name="SONAR_MAX_RANGE" value="2.2"/>
  <define name="SONAR_UPDATE_ON_AGL" value="TRUE"/>
  <define name="SONAR_VARIANCE_THRESHOLD" VALUE="2.0"/>
</section>

Can you post a recommended section setup for the SONAR sensor?

Also it would be helpful to know about the AGL related define if one flies in an area where the SRTM elevation data reflects a large variance with GPS derived HMSL and hence is not functional and not used.

Unfortunately I am currently away from home and cannot recheck my log data.

Regards

Stephen

On March 27, 2014 12:13 PM,Gautier Hattenberger wrote:

Hi,

I think I found the problem. It is not related to the waypoints or the
command, but rather from the estimation and the sonar sensor.
From the few flights I have done with the ARDrone, it seems that when
the sonar is out of range or can't get a "correct" range, it returns 0.
You can see it clearly in the log (INS_SONAR message). As you have only
set the SONAR_MAX_RANGE, the estimator only discard to high values, but
it takes all the 0 even when in flight. The result is that the estimator
always see you close to the ground (below the tracked altitude) and the
aircraft keep trying to climb.
Here are my suggestions:
- set INS_SONAR_MIN_RANGE to a small value above 0 (I have set it to 0.01)
- the threshold on sonar variance is probably useless since the baro is
really noisy (it is actually looking at the variance of the difference
between sonar and baro to see if the "change" in the direction)
- you can remove INS_SONAR_SENS, it is set outside of INS now (in
boards/ardrone/navdata.c)

I hope it will help you to solve your problem.

Gautier

Le 26/03/2014 22:53, Ben Laurie a écrit :

Data file is rather large, due to me taking quite a while to find the
copter after the crash... I'll send it offlist.

On 26 March 2014 20:59, Gautier Hattenberger
<address@hiddencom> wrote:

yes, .data file is needed to replay the flight, maybe we'll see if the
waypoints have been incorrectly moved when doing geo init.

Gautier

Le 26/03/2014 21:21, Ben Laurie a écrit :

On 26 March 2014 14:50, Gautier Hattenberger
<address@hiddencom> wrote:

Hi,

There are some recent changes in ins_reset functions, but I made a
successful flight last week with an ARdrone.
What is your flight plan ?

Flight plan is the standard rotorcraft_basic plan.

current and last working version ?

Current version is ad7994c7efc81b725823efff44e9ee9b83fe76bc, previous
working version was last year some time before xmas (can probably work
out exact version if needed). Been rather busy this year, was my first
chance to fly!

maybe your
flight log would help.

log attached - do you need the .data file, too?

Gautier

Le 26/03/2014 15:17, Ben Laurie a écrit :

Nearly lost my ardrone today ... latest master (plus my local stuff,
which is mostly just calibration) from 3 days ago. Took off, was fine.
Changed to "stay_p1" and it immediately started climbing, fast.
Switched to "land" before it went completely out of sight, which
luckily it did kinda do, though it ended up more-or-less out of
control and quite some way away where it hit trees. Possibly because
it thought it was landed well above ground level? Dunno.

Anyway, it looks like the waypoints are set to 200m above ground level
(207.78, to be precise) ... which is not what they used to do when GPS
lock is achieved and they all relocate.

Did something change?

BTW, I should have video, might be quite amusing :-)

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


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



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



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

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

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


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

 

---

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