@ThomasSFL I would like also to report several very successful landings like the three landings shown below.
However we still like to improve the device and we hope that we can work together.
In conditions where the sun is really strong we still have several landings where the IRLock failed to recognize the beacon.
One of the main problem is that we don’t know during descent whether the IRLock has recognized the beacon or not.
I know we can’t transfer this via MAVLINK since the protocol has no more room for such information.
So might it be possible to directly get this info out of the PIXY via the additional pins. Like a HIGH or LOW signal just representing found beacon or still don’t see beacon.
That would immensely improve the development and error handling during flight without looking every time after landing at the logfile to see how well the beacon has been recognized.
The HIGH or LOW signal can either be measured by the PIXHAWK directly or by a companion computer in my case.
So is the firmware that is currently on the PIXY opensource can I have a look and even change the suggestion by myself?
The best first-step is to upload the log files from your precision landing tests (especially the ones in which you suspect poor detection performance). We would like to analyze them.
We typically do not receive concerns regarding MarkOne detection performance, even in bright sunlight. So I hope we can diagnose and solve what may be causing the issue.
Here is a playlist of videos demonstrating reliable detection in bright sunlight conditions.
We have hundreds of log files however they don’t help you at all since we have around 80% good landings and 20% bad landings at the exact same spot exact same settings BUT only weather has changed (earlier in the morning, during noon, cloudy conditions, during sunset, during high and low temp etc.)
The problem we’re facing is that the landing pad made out of wood probably reflects a portion of the IR at certain angles, temperature etc. HOWEVER to further investigate this we need a direct feedback from the PIXY whether the IRBeacon has been detected or not. So we can hover for 40min above one spot of the landing pad and wait while the light changes etc. and see how the detection of the beacon changes. At the same time we can change the ground and more refection or put some plackets etc.
That’s why I asked you if you can help us to get this feedback out of the PIXY (probably change the firmware or open the firmware for us that we can change it ourselves) but you haven’t yet answered this question…
If you like to talk to use directly I sent you also some E-Mails over your website we’re a drone company trying to implement this system for commercial flights etc.
I have the same request and made it some time ago. It would be great to have some way of knowing if the beacon has be acquired or not. Having this feature would help us greatly in developing better landing pads and work to make the prec landing as close as possible to 100% reliable.
Having a variable that tells the user if the target is acquired or not in real time during landing would help operator to decide wheter the landing is ok or needs to be done manually. Expecially in confined areas.
We use a companion too, so even a pin on pixy would be ok.
You could stream logs over mavlink by setting LOG_BACKEND_TYPE=3, then look at the PL messages. You can then interrogate the TAcq field that tells you whether you have the target acquired. Ideally you could get this over a mavlink stream without having to look at the logs in realtime - it could be added to SRx_EXTRA3 stream for example.
@ThomasSFL Hum that’s weird. I also had a lot of interference in bright sunlight when metal is reflecting the sun. The pixy would get easily confused. Long time ago, I read the the beacon was doing some kind of frequency pattern but I could not verify this… Feedback on this ?
Thanks for your suggestion, once i set log_backend to 3 where i can look at logs in real time using mission planner on my pc?
Is there a file written in realtime during flights?
I don’t know how it works if streaming to a GCS like mission planner. Normally mavlink log_backend is used to stream to a companion computer onboard, through mavlink-router or dflogger, something like that. When using mavlink-router, it just saves a log file to the filesystem which you can then transfer and load into a GCS for graphing, or you can use something like this:
Hi Thomas, we are working on having precision loiter with IR lock. The PLND_ENABLED = 1 and PLND_TYPE = 2. We are getting all the values under PL as it should. But when we put it on prec.loiter it does not hold on to the beacon. It just drifts. Is there anything we are missing out on?
Hi,
Iam testing the IR-Lock for the first time.
The IR-Lock is recognized by the Pixhawk Pl Heal is 1
But the TAcq is always zero even when the copter starts and lands over the beacon.
The IR-Lock itself can find the beacon I have tested that with the piximon software.
IR-Lock firmware is 1.0.1
The firmware on the Pixhawk2 is 3.5.2.
No Rangefinder is installed. Is it necesarry to get TAcq or px py values?
Thank you so much for your patience! I am back from the hurricane.
Please make sure you are using MarkOne if you want reliable detection performance in bright sunlight. The other beacons are not capable of the same detection performance.
I wish we could check your IR-LOCK and MarkOne setup in-person, but we are limited to e-mail/forum discussion. The best ways for us to diagnose detection issue are:
(1) Upload a log and video of the precision landing test where you suspect detection issues
(2) Upload a recording of Pixymon video/detection feed
I would seriously enjoy checking those files/videos to try to diagnose the issue.
Regarding the reliability of MarkOne detection performance in different lighting conditions: the only issue we are aware of is when a reflective surface is placed IN FRONT OF the beacon (i.e., clear acrylic placed in front of beacon). Reflective surfaces NEARBY the bacon are completely ok.