| Christophe,
That is a wonderful explanation of a question I have had. Thank you!
I have a lot of very smart people in the USA asking me questions and selecting other projects because the other projects have the appearance of having more cutting edge projects available. Having an answer like this is exactly what I need to promote Paparazzi and get more people back using Paparazzi.
So many times I have wanted to say just this to those who read the marketing and see the new products almost daily from other projects. I hope you do not mind me giving this answer to my friends who ask about Paparazzi but tell me Paparazzi is less capable than the other projects.
-David
In my heart I know most of you and how smart and hard working you all are. I know Paparazzi has the best overall design and it's improving even more. On Sep 2, 2010, at 6:34 AM, Christophe De Wagter wrote: It looks like your extra "safety" mux is making it less safe! According to the webpage I google'd this switch uses a single RC channel to switch between the autopilot and the remote control. However, when you go out of range, then the RC doesn't work (which is normal) and your safety switch is switching at random as your receiver picks up noisy signals out of the air (normal but not nice!)
If you give the entire pulse combination from your receiver to paparazzi directly, it will check its integrity using all the defines from your radio file (repeat frequency, nr of pulses, etc: you can even make this so specific that it will accept your transmitter and not another type). If a full frame (full series of all pulses from all channels+ repeat rate) is not according to the definition, it is rejected. If too many frames are bad (RC REALLY LOST) then the autopilot takes over, which is probably better than random servo's.
Using the paparazzi autopilot as safety switch is as safe as it gets. This will stop the "uncontrolled switching" but will of coarse it will not increase your RC range. To solve that part, relocate stuff in you plane, shield things, use ferrites, remove ground loops, use better quality receiver, etc...
Christophe
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Ana García <address@hidden> wrote:
Hi,
I have been testing today the rc link range and have experienced some problems. My configuration is the tiny 2.11. The modems I use are xbee pro(2.4GHz), and my rc link is through 35Mhz. I use a Corona receiver with the PPM Encoder. In addition, I have a failsafe mux(from diydrones), so I have done some "Y" in order to output the signal from the RC receiver to the PPM encoder and the failsafe mux.
We've launched a flight session and verified that we had manual/autopilot swich control and when autopilot, auto2/auto1/manual control. Then we started moving away from the GCS. At some point, we lost the RC control and the engine started moving and stopping. The servos started moving autonomous. In addition, the failsafe mux has a led indicating manual/autopilot, and it looks like it switched alone.
I don't know if anybody has any idea about what may happen. We've thought about changing the rc receiver, including ferrites and removing the failsafe mux.
Thanks and sorry I've written a lot.
_______________________________________________
Paparazzi-devel mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
Paparazzi-devel mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
|