Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Hi Heiko,
Thank you for your feedback! Currently I'm trying to implement safety features,
requested by you in branch. And your feedback would be appreciated.
-PPM stream timeout - implemented, require some testing.
-During arm we need at least one valid PPM frame. It is the same as in V 1 and
RapidESC. Do you think is it sufficient? I do not mind adding some waits here,
just not sure is it really needed.
-Wait_for_power_on() did not changed. But due difference between arm value and
start value at least one valid PPM frame is required to pass this check. I
would prefer not to add additional waits here, as current start-up procedure
has ability to sync with rotating motor really quick. And it should be possible
to re-start the motor really quick.
-Pull-up on rcp_in. Initially it was set in AttachPPM(), but then was lost in
free_spin(). I have decided to change free_spin() to turn off FET's one-by-one.
This should preserve pull-up.
Regards,
Ziss_dm
Original comment by d.kayu...@gmail.com
on 20 Aug 2012 at 3:53
Original comment by d.kayu...@gmail.com
on 20 Aug 2012 at 11:25
Hi Dmitry,
I will test your changes tomorrow.
Arming: I think one valid ppm frame can accidently happen. I tested r270 with a
servo tester powerd by the ESC. The servo tester was set to 1400us before
powering it up. The ESC was always aremd and the motor started spinning.
The reason for the waits in wait_for_power_on(): With V1, when the ESCs are
already aremd and the FC is reseted with a reset button or by software (without
powering down the ESCs), the motors somtimes start to spin for a very short
time.
Cheers,
Heiko
Original comment by h3ifri
on 20 Aug 2012 at 7:45
Hi,
I have added wait for 50 frames and removed __delay_ms(250), so it feels the
same as before. ;)
I remember that, MWC doing the same on reboot. But I thought there something
wrong during initialization. As a workaround I have added wait for 15 frames,
and looks like this fixed problem with MWC.
regards,
ziss_dm
Original comment by d.kayu...@gmail.com
on 21 Aug 2012 at 12:19
Hi!
Tested your latest code on the bench and everything worked very well. I will do
some more tests on the weekend.
Is it possible with SDM to implement something like complementary PWM?
Cheers,
Heiko
Original comment by h3ifri
on 21 Aug 2012 at 7:42
Hi,
It should be possible to implement COMP-PWM. But I never heard, that somebody
actually using it. ;)
regards,
ziss_dm
Original comment by d.kayu...@gmail.com
on 22 Aug 2012 at 1:43
Hi,
I use the V1 version with COMP_PWM enabled for month! Maybe you don't hear
anything because it works perfect ;)
Cheers,
Heiko
Original comment by h3ifri
on 22 Aug 2012 at 4:20
Original comment by d.kayu...@gmail.com
on 28 Aug 2012 at 5:02
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
h3ifri
on 19 Aug 2012 at 11:18Attachments: