Warning #1: Compass calibration and reducing interference is far more important than with 2.9.1b
Warning #2: GPS glitches can cause sudden and aggressive position changes while in loiter mode. You may wish to reduce the Loiter PID P to 0.5 (from 1.0) to reduce aggressiveness (see image below of where this gain can be found in mission planner).
Warning #3: optical flow is not supported but will be back in the next release (AC-3.0.2 or AC-3.1.0).
Warning #4: loiter turns does not maintain altitude. This bug will be fixed in AC-3.0.2.
Warning #5: This release has only been lightly tested on Traditional Helicopters.
Improvements over 2.9.1b include:
WPNAV_SPEED, WPNAV_SPEED_UP, WPNAV_SPEED_DN, WPNAV_ACCEL allows configuring speeds and acceleration during missions
How to upgrade:
1. Make sure you are using Mission Planner 1.2.59 or newer (get it here)
2. Click on the MissionPlanner's Hardware, Install Firmware screen. The version numbers should appear as "ArduCopter-3.0.1", then click the appropriate frame icon and it should upgrade as per usual.
3. Reduce the Loiter and Alt Hold PIDs if you have modified them from the defaults. The modified PID values for the 3DR frame can be seen in the image below.
Note: Nav parameters have been combined with Loiter so do not be concerned if you can't find them.
5. Try out the new version in stabilize mode first, then alt-hold, then loiter and finally RTL and Auto.
Numerous How-To videos are available:
Special Thanks to Marco, DaveC and the large number of testers on the pre-release thread who put their copters at risk during the extended testing period. Some of their videos can be found here, here, here, here, here and here. Thanks also to MichaelO for the MP changes required for this release.
All feedback welcome. Please put your questions, comments (good and bad!) below.
Yes it is and with the longer arms. It didn't abort the tuning. I did because I was afraid it was going to rip itself apart to the aggressive rolls. The one that will not auto tune is the smaller honey badger quad. I've tried it about 10 times but it always fails the auto tune. Maybe arms too flexible?
I would like to see your new design :) Send me an email.
No problem with 2.91b so i'm looking forward trying 3.1 too...
Oliver, I was going to strip down my quad and replace this board with a second one I have which doesn't show those issues. Just don't know how fast I get to that - my APM is buried at the lowest level of the quad :)
If that works that should proof that the failure moves with the board and is not caused by any periphery. Like I posted earlier, for the test logs I only powered the APM and compass.
Besides, the 3.0.1 / 500kHz version works with a real dirty power supply. If I power mine over USB and have all periphery powered with it my board voltage jumps all over the place from 4.1V to 5.1V but no twitching can be seen.
Thanks Bruce, just for checking, where did you connect the BEC ?
I have to be sure that you did connect it to the PWM input side of the APM.
I powered it on port 8 on the PWM inputs. I'm open and ready for more ideas to test. Just send them my way! I have faith you guy's will beat this! Thanks!!!!
Haven't had the stamina to keep up with the thousands of posts.
Is 3.1 available?
Does it have all the vibration and compass restrictions that 3.0.1 does?
I s 3.1 documented or is it the same as 3.0.1?
Thanks very much . . . Cheers
The log does not look like full garbage on the SPI bus but the baro and IMU chips looks mad like if they had a very noisy 3v3 power supply inducing garbage on the ADC converters but keeping the digital circuits working normally.
That could be a decoupling problem between the 3V3 devices causing important noise on the baro and mpu6000 chips when the bus speed is rose to 8 Mhz.
Decoupling is managed by 1 uF capacitors C1, C5 and C9 around the MPU6000, MS5611 and the 5V to 3V3 spi bus level converter and 4.7 uF Capacitors C22,C23 near the 3V3 regulator.
If you have access to a scope, it would be interesting to check for the noise on the 3V3 power rail, watching if there is some heavy noise in the Mhz range.
The scope analyze i did on the SPI bus did not show hardware problems and a large safety margin even at 8 MHz (at least on my board). This is why i think that there is perhaps no problem on the SPI bus himself on your board.
Do you have a 3DR APM 2.5 board or a clone one ? Is it a recent one or an old one ?
I would be curious to see your board, it would be certainly easier to find the root cause. In the mean time we have to guess what's going on and that's not so easy.
I thought you said you haven't used DR yet?
I think what a "noticeable" difference is will depend on pilot skill and flying style. I have flown my high precision pylon racers with both 512 and 2048 setups (D99 w/ Hyperion digitals and super slop free linkage). To me the difference was very obvious. With 512 the step around center was either too high or too low and the recentering also was somewhat random. With 2048 I could easily dial in for a level lap, and return to center was always dead center. Shooting a quad through small gaps I feel requires precision similar to pylon racing... flipping and rolling a quad over an open field is similar to flying a plane 3d... whole different ballgames with very different equipment requirements. ;)
Also, I'm not sure what you mean about 1ms resolution? I'm using a 512 link on my copters like most FPVers (limited by PPM sum). My understanding is that 50% DR would reduce my resolution from 256 to 128 steps per side. 128 seems like a lot of steps, but human thumbs can have much higher resolution (again depending on style and skill level). I figure our rigs are flexible enough that 2048 may well be pointless. However custom acro rigs can be quite stiff and precise. So until I try tx DR for myself I have to assume I would notice the difference in stick resolution. If I could, I would also want to try a 2048 link between my thumbs and Pixhawk.
800kv 4s5000 10" can be a potent setup depending on the exact motors used (most "800kv" motors are not actually 800kv, and some are more efficient than others). That's the setup many folks use to carry a gopro on a 450 class rig. Regardless, too much lift is never quite enough.
Robert, did you try 3s lipo for your setup?
If it was me, I would either try 3s pack or, different props (like 8" or 9")
As far as I know, they upgraded some hardware in APM1 towards the end of the production. So if yours one of the earlier production APM1, it may not run 3.1-rc5
Also it is claimed that APM2.5 came to its limits and we are moving onto Pixhawk for that reason.
So how could a firmware barely works on APM2.5 work on APM1? This just doesn't make much sense to me...
How do you guys test RC failsafe? Just USB connected and watch MP?
How about a motor spin compromise?
0 = now spin
30 = motor just twitches (just like in motor setup)
> 50 = motor spins at desired rate
Default to 30. So indication about armed motors is given without actually spinning.