The extract_param_defaults.py inside the diatone_taycan_mxc.zip gives a different extract result from the previous version.
For example, ACRO_RP_EXPO can take floating number.
1 Like
Are you using the latest diatone_taycan_mxc.zip file?
1 Like
Apologies for the false alarm, the update was as fast as the stock market. Yes. the one with 4.3.8, 4.4.4, and 4.5.0-dev version settle very well for comparison software. Thank you for the great effort.
2 Likes
New version:
- added eCalc multirotor example screenshot
- updated diatone_taycan_mxc.zip file
- added estimation example on
14_pid_adjustment.paramfile - added support for ArduCopter 4.5.0-beta1 version
- added more unittests to the python scripts
- added estimation example on
- improved BL Heli settings to reduce the probability of ESC de-sync
- fixed wind estimation units
1 Like
@MartyMcFly the estimation example on 14_pid_adjustment.param file is for your particular use. It should reduce the time you need in autotune.
1 Like
Thank you so much you are A super star,you will be mentioned in dispatches ,have a great day Amilcarlucas and plenty of fun
@MartyMcFly have you already performed the autotune on your taycan?
If yes, ignore that file.
1 Like
yes but will look at your one as well and compare and thank you
Nice. Can you send me all your intermediate .param files (except 03_imu_temperature_calibration_results.param, 11_mp_setup_mandatory_hardware.param and 20_inflight_magnetometer_fit_results.param) in a .zip file, I would like to see the differences as well?
Is there another way to anonymize a log file? MP hidden anon log function seems like never stable before.
PSC_ACCZ_I to 2 x MOT_THST_HOVER
PSC_ACCZ_P to MOT_THST_HOVER
I like to know if there is a similar approach for PSC_ACCZ_n like the ATC_ACCEL_n_MAX?
Is it safe for the flight control to set it automatically if the formula is safe like the MOT_HOVER_LEARN?
ATC_ACCEL_P_MAX x (min_TOW / max_TOW)
ATC_ACCEL_R_MAX x (min_TOW / max_TOW)
ATC_ACCEL_Y_MAX x (min_TOW / max_TOW)
1 Like
No, currently there is not. It does make some sense, but I would need to look at the code to give you an answer.
2 Likes
Hi, amilcarlucas!
I’m very appreciative of this awesome guide! But I can’t understand this case: in the file “11_mp_setup_mandatory_hardware.param” ATC_ACCEL_P_MAX,193500. But in the documentation, this range is 0 - 180000. And ATC_ACCEL_P_MAX more than 180000… And the same situation with ATC_ACCEL_R_MAX,193500
Please explain to me why these values are so high. I’m stuck in this step(((
That specific file is for illustration purposes only, read the instructions carefully. I explicitly say to not edit it and to not load it.
There are three such files, that you shouldn’t edit, nor use. I hope you know which three I am referring to. Or should I add another paragraph explaining that a second time in more detail?
1 Like
Assuming the innermost angle rate control loop is performing correctly, and that the second level angle control loop is doing OK. Below are the default Loiter parameters, 12.5m/s (LOIT_SPEED) is way too fast for big craft with space constraints for example. what are the recommendations to tune? Just lower the LOIT_SPEED, for example to 250, and leave the rest at it is or users should lower it proportionally, for example including LOIT_ACC_MAX, LOIT_BRK_ACCEL, LOIT_BRK_JERK.
LOIT_ACC_MAX,500
LOIT_ANG_MAX,0
LOIT_BRK_ACCEL,250
LOIT_BRK_DELAY,1
LOIT_BRK_JERK,500
LOIT_SPEED,1250
Do you find 12.5m/s too fast?
What you can do is lower the LOIT parameters, even below the default limits, to suit your preference.
(I also think that LOIT_BRK_DELAY shoyld be set to 0, even all developers are suggesting 0.3 or 0.4 
)
1 Like
It really depends on the vehicle and your requirements. But so far we always set LOIT_BRK_DELAY,0.1 or 0. It has to be iteratively tested.
2 Likes
Looks like you reached file 41. Nice. What do you think of the tune? Does it feel responsive?
2 Likes
Thank you for your answer. Yes, I know about these three files) I very carefully read your guide. But do we need to make temperature calibration for CubeOrange+ ? I think this calibration was made in factory… Or do I wrong?
2 Likes
ATC_ACCEL_P_MAX (and other parameters) can be outside of the range for small vehicles or for really big ones. That is not an issue.
No, I talked to a ProfiCNC employee and the calibration is done in the factory, but not saved to the flight controller. So it will not have any effect. So you need to do it again, and save the results to a file like I explained. Then you can even reuse it if you need to reset the parameters at some point.
2 Likes