Bump detection with landing WPs

For everything that doesn't fit into the other (sub-) forums

Re: Bump detection with landing WPs

Postby LPR » Sat Nov 14, 2015 5:14 am

Srinath

That would be a very good way to see if the deceleration triggered the disarming of the quad.

The one thing that may have contributed to the crash was having a large, 20 meter, radius of influence for the landing WP.

Larry
LPR
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 1:29 pm
Location: MN, USA

Re: Bump detection with landing WPs

Postby srinath » Sat Nov 14, 2015 5:18 am

LPR wrote:Srinath

That would be a very good way to see if the deceleration triggered the disarming of the quad.

The one thing that may have contributed to the crash was having a large, 20 meter, radius of influence for the landing WP.

Larry


Please mail me your parameters & waypoint file. It takes some time to set up a new craft on HILS, but I will run it early next week & see what happens.
Also need your start lat/lon/alt
srinath
 
Posts: 1028
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:47 pm

Re: Bump detection with landing WPs

Postby LPR » Sat Nov 14, 2015 5:36 am

Srinath

I will get that information for you tomorrow.

Larry
LPR
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 1:29 pm
Location: MN, USA

Re: Bump detection with landing WPs

Postby srinath » Thu Nov 19, 2015 7:49 am

LPR wrote:Srinath

I will get that information for you tomorrow.

Larry


So the problem was caused by having 2 Landing waypoints. First landing WP was quite a few mtrs off the ground. AQ disarms on reaching a landing WP. This caused the crash.
Problem solved. Case closed
srinath
 
Posts: 1028
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:47 pm

Re: Bump detection with landing WPs

Postby chschmid » Thu Nov 19, 2015 9:16 am

I do not agree here:

Code: Select all
    if (navData.mode == NAV_STATUS_MISSION) {
        // recalculate autonomous heading
        navSetHoldHeading(navData.targetHeading);

        // wait for low throttle if landing
        if (curLeg->type == NAV_LEG_LAND && motorsData.throttle <= 1)
            // shut everything down (sure hope we are really on the ground :)
            supervisorDisarm();
    }


Why was motorsData.throttle <= 1 detected at the first landing WP?

Cheers
Christof
chschmid
 
Posts: 1800
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 7:41 pm
Location: Herrliberg, Switzerland

Re: Bump detection with landing WPs

Postby srinath » Thu Nov 19, 2015 9:39 am

chschmid wrote:I do not agree here:

Code: Select all
    if (navData.mode == NAV_STATUS_MISSION) {
        // recalculate autonomous heading
        navSetHoldHeading(navData.targetHeading);

        // wait for low throttle if landing
        if (curLeg->type == NAV_LEG_LAND && motorsData.throttle <= 1)
            // shut everything down (sure hope we are really on the ground :)
            supervisorDisarm();
    }


Why was motorsData.throttle <= 1 detected at the first landing WP?

Cheers
Christof


After a landing WP is 'achieved' the nav controller seems to set motorsData.throttle to minimum value (1 or 0)
remember that radio_throttle is in your control. Everything else goes through Nav controller
Try it on a mission. That's what happens.
srinath
 
Posts: 1028
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:47 pm

Re: Bump detection with landing WPs

Postby LPR » Thu Nov 19, 2015 3:48 pm

Srinath and Christof

The reason I was using two landing WPs was to have a quick way to lower altitude at the horizontal position of the last non landing WP.

I've used an 18 meter ROI on a landing WP in a mission that was flying at 6 m/s and it worked great. The quad had a nice curved landing. It lost altitude while still slowing down.

So I thought that 20 m/s might work just as well. All the WPs in the crash mission had 20 meter of ROI which let the quad make corners and not slow down. How ROI works is still a little confusing to me but I think when the quad is at 20 meters from the landing WP Nav controller uses some of the landing WP settings from the upcoming WP to control the quad.

My guess is that the motors being turned off was caused by the throttle being lowered as the quad started flying inside the ROI and by the time the quad was at the landing WP the throttle was low enough to trigger the disarming of the quad.

To stop a crash I think I can still use the two landing WPs but I'll have the ROI be at 1.5 meters and just to be sure there's no crashing a 5 second loiter on the last non landing WP would not hurt.

I will also need to add a 6 m/s WP before the landing WP to stop the quad from overshooting the landing WPs. Adjusting the Nav settings can stop the overshooting but those settings really slow down the acceleration.

It would be really nice to have a separate control for braking because a copter can brake at a much higher angle than used during acceleration and not lose altitude.

The large ROI keeps the overshooting of the corner WPs from being a problem when flying at 20 m/s. I still need to try 30 m/s so I can make use of a tail wind. The camera's for farm field photos work well at 30 m/s if there's bright sunlight.

Larry
Attachments
AQ HOME 160.txt
(1.16 KiB) Downloaded 112 times
Crash Home 160 Mission.jpg
160 acre mission.jpg
Last edited by LPR on Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
LPR
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 1:29 pm
Location: MN, USA

Re: Bump detection with landing WPs

Postby srinath » Thu Nov 19, 2015 5:11 pm

Instead of 2 landing WP's, why not use 1 Regular WP and 1 Landing WP
First one(Regular WP) gets you down fast to a certain height (say 4 mtrs above ground). Then the Landing WP makes the craft descend slowly and disarms on contact with ground.
Keep ROI at 1-2 mtrs.
srinath
 
Posts: 1028
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:47 pm

Re: Bump detection with landing WPs

Postby LPR » Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:48 pm

Srinath

In most of the US large farm areas flying from 200 to 400 feet is usually free of aircraft if you're not near an airport. During the growing season, spray planes are flying from 5 to 150 feet of altitude. It's much better to stay at a higher altitude and then come straight down as quickly as possible. I've tried to use a Takeoff WP with a negative number but that doesn't work. Using a normal WP to come straight down will let you descend at 2.5 m/s which is quite slow when you're at 120 meters.

The faster you can descend the less chance you have to be in the way of spray planes and the less battery capacity you use. I've tested the Field Eye at 10 m/s descending and that works quite well.

I could change the Nav Alt Position settings so I could have a much faster altitude change with a normal WP but that would also change the APH altitude control speed to be faster than I like.

Larry
LPR
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 1:29 pm
Location: MN, USA

Re: Bump detection with landing WPs

Postby LPR » Fri Nov 20, 2015 12:12 am

Srinath

Here's a look at the last few seconds of the crash log. It now looks to me that the combination of the large ROI and high descent speed caused the disarming of the motors or maybe just the descent rate of 10 m/s.

I don't think I'll try using the same settings again.

Larry
Attachments
KML of the Crash.jpg
Crash last few seconds Home 160.jpg
LPR
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 1:29 pm
Location: MN, USA

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests