Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Sparkfun

[Felix Ruess]

Hi Christian,

I believe the team from Bremen used a Razzor IMU with paparazzi and
that code currently resides in a branch...

Would be really nice if that would be merged into the main branch!
*winking at the guys in Bremen*

Also the new aspirin IMU and Lisa/M autopilot are nearly ready....

Cheers, Felix

On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Christian Behrens
<address@hidden> wrote:
> Hello,
> does anybody know if it's possible to connect this IMU:
> http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/product_info.php?products_id=9623
> to the Tiny 2.0 via SPI Interface.
> I'm asking this because the SPI Interface on the IMU has no Pin for the
> interrupt.
>
> Thanks in advance for your answers
>
> Christian
>
> *************************************
> Christian Behrens
> Universität Tübingen
> Institut für Geowissenschaften
> Sigwartstraße10
> 72072 Tübingen
> +4970212973136
> +491637164872
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 24.06.2010, 16:49 -0400 schrieb
> address@hidden:
>> Send Paparazzi-devel mailing list submissions to
>>       address@hidden
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>       http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>       address@hidden
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>       address@hidden
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Paparazzi-devel digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. Re: Thoughts about the GCS (Michele Santucci)
>>    2. Re: Any Italian Paparazziers? (Michele Santucci)
>>    3. Re: Thoughts about the GCS (Roman Krashanitsa)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:48:47 +0200
>> From: "Michele Santucci" <address@hidden>
>> Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Thoughts about the GCS
>> To: <address@hidden>
>> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> Hi Roman, Hi everyone,
>>
>> I don't know either Gator team or Peter Ifju so I don't know if they're 
>> involved in OpenJaus.
>> For my knowledge of JAUS the standard is an US DoD spin-off tought for 
>> military Unmanned
>> Veichles (it started for Unmanned Ground assets and then it's been 
>> generalized to generic UV).
>> In my company we're going to use it to open-up the communication protocol of 
>> our UV.
>> I think this's a good starting point to open further Paparazzi structure of 
>> course keeping under
>> control the complexity and the overhead of a multipurpose protocol.
>>
>>     bye by[t]e{s}... TuX!
>>
>>
>> From: Roman Krashanitsa
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 8:38 PM
>> To: address@hidden
>> Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Thoughts about the GCS
>>
>>
>> Michele,
>>
>> very good find! Do you know if this is done by Gator team and Peter Ifju? I 
>> was not aware that they are involved with this kind of through software spec 
>> development. Or may be it's not them..
>>
>> I think, the spec is so high-level and general that at the current stage, 
>> any autopilot will fit or can be made to fit. Well, unless they will try to 
>> specify format of the node-level-and-below messages.
>>
>> Roman
>>
>> 2010/6/23 Michele Santucci <address@hidden>
>>
>>   Hallo everybody!
>>
>>   even if this thread is apparently closed I would encourage anyone 
>> interested in GCS development
>>   and/or in UAV<->GCS communication to give a look to OpenJaus 
>> (http://www.openjaus.com/).
>>   I personally think that Paparazzi already have a good GCS and reliable 
>> protocol but IMHO keeping
>>   in touch with the efforts of creating a standard it's never a bad idea.
>>
>>       bye by[t]e{s}... TuX!
>>
>>
>>   From: Marko Thaler
>>   Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 3:43 PM
>>   To: address@hidden
>>   Subject: [Paparazzi-devel] Thoughts about the GCS
>>
>>
>>   Hello everybody!
>>
>>
>>   I have been observing the communication on the development board with 
>> regards to the future Paparazzi GCS development and the OCaml programming 
>> language.
>>
>>
>>   I have my deepest respect for the work Pascal has done on the GCS and 
>> Paparazzi in general. Now that we have lost him I gradually start to 
>> comprehend the enormous hole he has left behind and the implications of 
>> using a programming language for the GCS that is not widely adopted.
>>
>>
>>   As I understand the basic problem for future Paparazzi GCS development is 
>> the lack of OCaml programming skills that are present in the community. At 
>> the same time in the worldwide open source UAV communities there is a 
>> stronger and stronger desire for defining open standards for UAV <-> GCS 
>> communication and provide an open GCS development platform.  Is there a 
>> common solution to both problems?
>>
>>
>>   I do not know! However, while surfing the internet I came across the 
>> QGroundControl from the PixHawk team that tries to provide open standards 
>> and a general UAV GCS (everything written in GPL-ed C++ Qt framework). I 
>> understand there would be quite a lot of work to transition the Paparazzi 
>> system to another GCS (reintegrate communication protocol, rewrite the 
>> generation of control parameters from the airframe file, etc.). But maybe in 
>> the long run the Paparazzi community and open source UAV communities in 
>> general could benefit from using a common GCS development platform.
>>
>>
>>   I would love to hear your thoughts and opinions about the future Paparazzi 
>> GCS development options.
>>
>>
>>   Thank you and kind regards,
>>
>>
>>   Marko
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>   _______________________________________________
>>   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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>> address@hidden
>> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: 
>> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/paparazzi-devel/attachments/20100624/da1d27ff/attachment.html
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:54:22 +0200
>> From: "Michele Santucci" <address@hidden>
>> Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Any Italian Paparazziers?
>> To: <address@hidden>
>> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>>       reply-type=original
>>
>> Hallo Gareth, Hallo everyone,
>>
>> I'm not in Florence and I'm not an official Paparazzier (up to now I'm just
>> a mailing list reader working on UV)
>> but I'm going to become one soon.
>> Anyway if you're going to descend a little more to the south I can provide
>> you some assistance near
>> La Spezia (about 200km from Florence).
>>
>> bye by[t]e{s}... TuX!
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Gareth Roberts" <address@hidden>
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 1:29 AM
>> To: <address@hidden>
>> Subject: [Paparazzi-devel] Any Italian Paparazziers?
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > We've been hired to carry out a volcanic gas sensing experiment on three
>> > volcanoes in the south of Italy.  However, as our gear is pretty delicate
>> > and we don't trust airlines, we are planning to drive from the UK to
>> > Sicily, with a stop somewhere along the way, probably Florence.  If
>> > Florence, we have somewhere to stay but need secure parking as we are
>> > towing a trailer.
>> >
>> > I was wondering if anyone knows of anywhere we could park a car and
>> > trailer overnight in Florence safely?  In return, we can offer paparazzi
>> > help if you need it, plus beverages of your choice.  Just thought I'd put
>> > this out on the off-chance.
>> > Was also wondering if anyone has experience of taking nitro fuel (~20l) on
>> > a cross channel ferry.
>> >
>> > Many thanks!
>> > --G
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>> > address@hidden
>> > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:49:22 -0700
>> From: Roman Krashanitsa <address@hidden>
>> Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Thoughts about the GCS
>> To: address@hidden
>> Message-ID:
>>       <address@hidden>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> Hi everyone, hi Michele,
>>
>> I am very glad that finally there is a some sort of standard to follow if
>> one wants to implement a communication protocol for a new project.
>>
>> However, I have several questions as to viability of JAUS for the paparazzi.
>>
>> 1. Paparazzi is a mature project with its own reliable and robust protocol.
>>
>> 2. Range of projects that use Paparazzi is pretty significant with airplanes
>> as small as 30cm span where weight savings is a primary concern.
>> Adding this standard compliance at system level will require an additional
>> on-board translator taxing performance and adding weight to the system. By
>> the way, we already have some unnecessary in my opition, steps in
>> communication protocol, such as adding CRC to paparazzi protocol messages
>> when they are wrapped into XBee protocol which also has error control.
>>
>> 3. If we consider a system as an airplane+ground station when it would be
>> relatively easy to add some JAUS translator thanks to the openness of the
>> Paparazzi messaging and Ivy bus. So than JAUS entry point and exit point
>> from/to Paparazzi will be the ground station.
>>
>> As far as I understood from the JAUS specs, there is no such a hierarchy
>> level as airplane+ground station..
>>
>> Also, do we really want a compliance to a military standard at all?
>>
>>
>> What do you guys think?
>> Sincerely,
>> Roman Krashanitsa
>>
>> 2010/6/24 Michele Santucci <address@hidden>
>>
>> >  Hi Roman, Hi everyone,
>> >
>> > I don't know either Gator team or Peter Ifju so I don't know if they're
>> > involved in OpenJaus.
>> > For my knowledge of JAUS the standard is an US DoD spin-off tought for
>> > military Unmanned
>> > Veichles (it started for Unmanned Ground assets and then it's been
>> > generalized to generic UV).
>> > In my company we're going to use it to open-up the communication protocol
>> > of our UV.
>> > I think this's a good starting point to open further Paparazzi structure of
>> > course keeping under
>> > control the complexity and the overhead of a multipurpose protocol.
>> >
>> >     bye by[t]e{s}... TuX!
>> >
>> >  *From:* Roman Krashanitsa <address@hidden>
>> > *Sent:* Wednesday, June 23, 2010 8:38 PM
>> >  *To:* address@hidden
>> > *Subject:* Re: [Paparazzi-devel] Thoughts about the GCS
>> >
>> > Michele,
>> >
>> > very good find! Do you know if this is done by Gator team and Peter Ifju? I
>> > was not aware that they are involved with this kind of through software 
>> > spec
>> > development. Or may be it's not them..
>> >
>> > I think, the spec is so high-level and general that at the current stage,
>> > any autopilot will fit or can be made to fit. Well, unless they will try to
>> > specify format of the node-level-and-below messages.
>> >
>> > Roman
>> > 2010/6/23 Michele Santucci <address@hidden>
>> >
>> >>  Hallo everybody!
>> >>
>> >> even if this thread is apparently closed I would encourage anyone
>> >> interested in GCS development
>> >> and/or in UAV<->GCS communication to give a look to OpenJaus (
>> >> http://www.openjaus.com/).
>> >> I personally think that Paparazzi already have a good GCS and reliable
>> >> protocol but IMHO keeping
>> >> in touch with the efforts of creating a standard it's never a bad idea.
>> >>
>> >>     bye by[t]e{s}... TuX!
>> >>
>> >>  *From:* Marko Thaler <address@hidden>
>> >> *Sent:* Thursday, June 10, 2010 3:43 PM
>> >>  *To:* address@hidden
>> >> *Subject:* [Paparazzi-devel] Thoughts about the GCS
>> >>
>> >> Hello everybody!
>> >>
>> >> I have been observing the communication on the development board with
>> >> regards to the future Paparazzi GCS development and the OCaml programming
>> >> language.
>> >>
>> >> I have my deepest respect for the work Pascal has done on the GCS and
>> >> Paparazzi in general. Now that we have lost him I gradually start to
>> >> comprehend the enormous hole he has left behind and the implications of
>> >> using a programming language for the GCS that is not widely adopted.
>> >>
>> >> As I understand the basic problem for future Paparazzi GCS development is
>> >> the lack of OCaml programming skills that are present in the community. At
>> >> the same time in the worldwide open source UAV communities there is a
>> >> stronger and stronger desire for defining open standards for UAV <-> GCS
>> >> communication and provide an open GCS development platform.  Is there a
>> >> common solution to both problems?
>> >>
>> >> I do not know! However, while surfing the internet I came across the
>> >> QGroundControl <http://qgroundcontrol.org/start> from the 
>> >> PixHawk<http://pixhawk.ethz.ch/> team
>> >> that tries to provide open standards and a general UAV GCS (everything
>> >> written in GPL-ed C++ Qt <http://qt.nokia.com/> framework). I understand
>> >> there would be quite a lot of work to transition the Paparazzi system to
>> >> another GCS (reintegrate communication protocol, rewrite the generation of
>> >> control parameters from the airframe file, etc.). But maybe in the long 
>> >> run
>> >> the Paparazzi community and open source UAV communities in general could
>> >> benefit from using a common GCS development platform.
>> >>
>> >> I would love to hear your thoughts and opinions about the future Paparazzi
>> >> GCS development options.
>> >>
>> >> Thank you and kind regards,
>> >>
>> >> Marko
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>  ------------------------------
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> 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
>> >>
>> >>
>> >  ------------------------------
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>> >
>> >
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: 
>> http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/paparazzi-devel/attachments/20100624/4b055873/attachment.html
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>> address@hidden
>> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>>
>>
>> End of Paparazzi-devel Digest, Vol 75, Issue 43
>> ***********************************************
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
>