Issues & Pull Requests
Plane
Copter
GSOC
Attendee count (max): 13
- Add deprecation message to mavlink
UTC1100 - Remove experimental warning by Hwurzburg · Pull Request #36 · ArduPilot/CustomBuild · GitHub
- Remove warning aon build server about being experimental
UTC1105 - Support VTOL_LAND options by WickedShell · Pull Request #14874 · ArduPilot/ardupilot · GitHub
- Support VTOL landing options
- Mavlink update
- Needs double-shuffle mavlink update
- Mavlink commit needs some PRs squished
- Backport isn’t going to happen…
UTC1110 - AP_Vehicle: add AIS by IamPete1 · Pull Request #18332 · ArduPilot/ardupilot · GitHub
- Move AIS up to vehicle
- Weird dummy methods thing
- Costs 300 bytes when feature disabled
- Rover will no longer get this
- Dummy methods on everything else 300 bytes
- Separate AIS message
- How would users know they can get AIS from the custom build server?
- Something in the AIS section of the Wiki?
- Need to make that bit common….
- Use multiple values for AP_AIS_ENABLED to work out whether to use dummy methods or real methods (i.e. 1 gets you full support, 2 gets you the dummy methods, with the default of 2)
- Ship-landing people will like this
- Resting voltage not working with smart batteries
- This fixes that
- Backend limit
- Distributes extra voltages across all cells
- Individual backends are packing cells separately which isn’t bad
- If you don’t have too many cells then this won’t change things EXCEPT fix sag corrected voltage
- Can only support up to 14 cells in current mavlink, so this allows batteries with more cells
- 16, 18 and more
- LH: we’ll get to 400V
- Some people have 100 cell battery
- Scale-factor hack doesn’t work on smart batteries
- Automatically set field elevation from origin
- Microcontrollers on sensors can heat the air causing bad readings…
- Keep a history of outside air temperatures
- Look for gaps in times, find most recent temperature
- Use a separate temperature sensor?
- Use atmospheric model to calibrate temperature sensors?
- Merged
- Removed pointless (void) of parameter
- Parameter defaults
- What’s the default value?
- How about ones we set every boot not the default?
- E.g. Mot_pwm_min is set to 1000 for digital
- Tridge thinks 1000 is the default, not whatever is in MOT_PWM_MIN default value
- A tickbox for “show non-default parameters” shouldn’t be cluttered by this?
- Is it useful to know that the default has been set through a mechanism other than the defaults table?
- “The default value of a parameter is the value a parameter would have if all other parameters were as they are now and the user has never touched this parameter”
- Mechanics first, getting everything right later?
- Tridge thinks we should merge the ones we’ve found
- GCS compare button will make things very obvious
- This is close
- Just need to work on all the corner cases
- Maybe get this in DevCallEU
- Unrelated: FTP on F4 boards?
- If it fails to create FTP thread then it uses the IO thread
- Make IO thread default on F4 boards?
- Remove verbiage from hwdef files
- MergeOnCIPass
- fixed check for fixed wing approach QRTL start
- 4.3 use full position control for entire landing approach?
- We use main velocity controller in 4.2
- But not position controller
- Asymmetries in constraints make this stuff tricky
- Some sort of override to the way limits work?
- May need a more complex controller all over to do it
- Merged!
UTC0021 - Dev: backing out a stable release is difficult · Issue #21066 · ArduPilot/ardupilot · GitHub
- Backing out a stable release is difficult
- Discuss off-line or after call?
- 4.2.2 early report from partner of difficulties
- Probably GPS-related, not the software at all
- Beta is 4.2.2rc2 but official is
- Need to update both stable and beta tags
- Then need to delete new version from build server
- 4.2.2 early report from partner of difficulties
- Fix docs generator aliasing
- LUA docs only
- Merged!
UTC0032 - hwdef: added telem3 on Pixhawk6X by tridge · Pull Request #21112 · ArduPilot/ardupilot · GitHub
- Adds usart2 to pixhawk6x
- Another hardware flow control
- Benefit of coming to the modular party late was they knew to add more pins
- New board
- Fmuv3 variant
- Lsm - boo!
- Heater
- MFE-PixSurveyA1
- No bootloader
- Might be nice to have a document in the dev wiki outlining what we like to have in the hwdef directories
- E.g. pinouts
UTC0036 - Plane update
- Plane: stable 4.2.x issues list · Issue #15941 · ArduPilot/ardupilot · GitHub
- PR is open for 4.2.3
- Plane: prepare for 4.2.3beta1 by tridge · Pull Request #21110 · ArduPilot/ardupilot · GitHub
- 6C and 6X
- Will add MFE
- Fixes QRTL issue
- Healthy check on battery monitor backends (plural)
- Fixes CANBUS issue
- Should’ve been unhealthy
- And arming checks…
- unhealthy but high voltage
- Voltage checks were generally OK
- Plugin of drive battery after boot
- So we can detect sensors after boot
- Late compass detection?
- And RangeFinder
- And Airspeed sensors (on hatch….)
- Probe thread always started and reprobing done back there
UTC0045 - Copter/Rover: 4.2.0 issues list · Issue #20192 · ArduPilot/ardupilot · GitHub
- We’ll restart beta testing for 4.2.2 soon
- Allow partner to re-test to make sure problem was unrelated to 4.2.2
- No changes will be made to 4.2.2
- Randy didn’t have a lot of confidence in the release
- Only left it out for a week
- Andy said he was confident of it
- But after the claw-back was done
- Circling issues when circle rate exceeds required yaw rate
- 90 degree/second fast turn and yaw couldn’t keep up
- Document it?
- DO_CHANGE_SPEED doesn’t work directly after takeoff command
- Because takeoff doesn’t use wpnav
- Because pnav gets initiated on first actual waypoint
- 90 degree/second fast turn and yaw couldn’t keep up
- Solo gimbal not working?
- It does move but Solex app can’t see it
- Maybe looking for heartbeat?
- Not far from releasing 4.3
- Early August we’d start beta testing 4.3
UTC0052 - GSoC update
- Autonomous docking update
- Videos of testing in Gazebo with new DOCK mode
- Precision landing library can be used horizontally
- Virtual docking port with April tag on it and the vehicle can get there
- Comes at it at an angle ATM
- Wants to come at it square-on, ‘though
- Sankeet is working on easing ROS integration
- Allow AP to offload navigation to ROS
- Cleaning up Randy’s work…
- Allow AP to offload navigation to ROS
- Luxonis camera over water is being tested
- Would like Henry to get camera so he can help with testing
- New version of camera coming…
- Emre’s on call, PH’s student
- PR in next couple of days
- Easier for researchers to work new attitude controllers into ArduPIlot
- E.g. matlab-based controllers
- Runtime-selectable with any lucky
- RC switch to change attitude controller
UTC0059 - Here3 GPS no fix in Mission Planner, but UAVCAN inspector shows Coordinates - Here GPS - Cubepilot
- CAN GPSs we don’t auto-config except for CAN moving baseline and the like
- We don’t configure message rates and whatnot
- Moving base only applies to F9s
- Documentation could be improved….
- AP_Periph-based devices do the moving baseline stuff appropriately
UTC0102 - Callisto model
- Yaw a bit funny and wobbled around
- SITL model has no dependency on size of aircraft
- Torque is fixed
- So larger aircraft, large mass, yaw control is same as every other aircraft
- Small fix that scales yaw control with thrust….
- Unsure if that’s correct….
- Make change in such a way that is doesn’t affect default model
- Unless that model is broken
- In which case might have a bit of pain….
- Unless that model is broken
- Maybe a nicer simulation - closer physical model?
- More work on Callisto?
- Current values in JSON file are generally easy to work with
- Default parameters stuff PH is working on would be useful here
- PH has a few bits floating around
UTC0012 - triple-notch-filter
- Same attenuation number for single/double/triple
- Overlap makes for massive attenuation
- Goal is someone can go single ->triple and retain existing tuning performance
- Two approaches
- To reap benefits for phase lang you must lower the attenuation
- Improve-your-tuning perspective
- Would need to retune to get benefirt
- From improve noise-attenuation perspective
- Can go single → triple and not change any tuning
- Just get reduced noise levels
- To reap benefits for phase lang you must lower the attenuation
- Leonard’s happy with the way stuff is currently done with the three-notch
- Triple the CPU cost
- But we stopped doing notch on every IMU
- Could we create a triple-notch filter class that does all the maths in one place and save CPU?
- Each notch has poles and zeroes
- Two forms of implementations of discrete-time filters to represent those poles and zeroes
- Can’t do equivalent three-notch filter with fewer polls/zeroes
- Maybe something that’s close?
- There are band-stop filters which are combinations of lp/hf
- In order to get sharp edges you need higher orders (poles/zeroes)
- Can’t do equivalent three-notch filter with fewer polls/zeroes
- Two forms of implementations of discrete-time filters to represent those poles and zeroes
- Might be able to get marginal improvement but it’s going to be hardcore digital filtering
- Band-stop filters Cheby-chef style filters
- Different ripple characteristics
- If you have really precise filter requirements
- But when you’re just doing what we’re doing the notch is a very efficient filter
- Fire
- Each notch has poles and zeroes
- 18Hz ICE engines are a pain
- Very low frequency vibrations
- Several Hz wide notch
- Significant phase lag
- Uncertainty in RPM
- Can now log pre and post filter at same time
- Want real-time fft to be able to do cleanup of the throttle/esc rpm filters
- Want to be able to log each filter separately
- Wrapping in FilterTool?
- Many other cool changes too (inc log-scale)
- Full PID models
- Maybe later
- Want to be able to upload logs and see what difference it would make / where the filters would apply
- 4.2.2?
- No, probably 4.3
- About 8 week’s time
UTC0139 - close