Warning #1: PX4/Pixhawk users upgrading from AC3.1.5 (or earlier) may need to re-do their compass and accelerometer calibration because AC3.2 also uses the backup compass and accels. Pre-arm checks have been added to ensure this has been done.
Warning #2: on the APM2.x the logs must be downloaded using MAVlink instead of the terminal.
AC3.2-rc14 is now available for BetaTesters through the mission planner’s Beta Firmwares link. The full release notes can be found in ReleaseNotes.txt and changes from -rc13 can be seen below.
Feel free to raise issues found during testing on this discussion or in the new support section in the APM Forum.
It’s a big release with “the onion” restructure and a bunch of new features (including these 57 closed items) so we need to re-test almost everything including all flight modes, all mission commands and all the new features. Marco and I will be maintaining (and adding to) this testing list. Issues reported will first be checked by Jonathan, Marco and I and then confirmed bugs/issues will be put on the github issues list (and then hopefully fixed).
Thanks especially to the beta testers who put their copters at risk testing each release. Enjoy!
Changes from 3.2-rc13
1) Safety Features:
a) fail to arm if second gyro calibration fails (can be disabled with ARMING_CHECK)
2) Bug fixes:
a) DCM-check to require one continuous second of bad heading before triggering LAND
b) I2C bug that could lead to Pixhawk freezing up if I2C bus is noisy
c) reset DCM and EKF gyro bias estimates after gyro calibration (DCM heading could drift after takeoff due to sudden change in gyro values)
d) use primary GPS for LED status (instead of always using first GPS)
Replies
:) rc5, rc6, rc7 - PosHold.
will this update require compass/accel calibration if upgrading from RC 6?
Thor,
No, there's no changes to the compass dev-id between -rc6 and -rc7 so that horror should be mostly behind us.
Randy,
I fully understand that the EKF smoothing patch from Paul is not included.
What I can say is that I have tested it for about 5 hours of flight time now (mostly PosHold and Auto) and there are absolutely no problems.
Regards,
Thorsten
Thorsten,
Worst case I think we will include it in a AC3.2.1 release which won't be too long after AC3.2.
I noticed the long flight time on your copter, very impressive!
Thanks Randy for this update!
Randy & Devs,
Attached is another two flights using with both GPS units plotting the way, this time I ran it down my street and back behind homes. I thought you'd like to review it. Again the primary GPS/Compass is the LEA-6H and the GPS2 is the NEO-7M.
So far I'm very pleased and thankful for you software geniuses! Keep up the great work.
2014-09-03 15-49-53.log.zip
2014-09-03 18-38-14.tlog.zip
Hi Doug
I just spent well over an hour going back and forth from the 6H and the 7M connected to my pixhawk with rc6. The time frames to get sats and the number of sats they each aquired seemed very very similar. However regardless of what it said on the ground station I think the 6H was more consistent. I thought the fact the 7M cost more would mean it would be better but judging from actual flying the 6H just seemed better. It would consistently land within a 1-2 meter spot on RTL even with only 6-7 sats. The 7 M just took off I had to intervene quickly and this was with several disarm / rearm to recalibrate home to give it a second chance. Another thing I seemed to notice is the alt hold was more consistent. I don't yet understand what the gps or compass has to do with that seems like it the baro would but I absolutely noticed a more consistent altitude with the 6H. It was however very windy... so maybe it was just a little luck the way the wind gusts were when it was the 6H turn. Thanks for your test!! I only wish I knew what all those lines mean in the logs :] I'm trying to learn about all that from some pages on wiki. I'm anxious to hear how you like the M8
Doug,
Ok, so stick with the LEA-6H over the NEO-7M. It looks like the NEO-7M gets to the same number of sats and hdop but it took many minutes. Of course it's possible that you run with the LEA-6H more so it had more up-to-date satellite data.
I'd be curious to know if the NEO-7M would also lag behind on later flight, given that eventually it acquired just as many satelites and had just as good of an HDOP (took about 4.5 min), or if it would keep the acquired sats and behave more similar to the 6H.
-
228
-
229
-
230
-
231
-
232
of 373 Next