Projects (W24 focused)

W24 status table, using 2023-2024 Project List and discussion with @Mihir Gupta @Amy Hu

Detailed notes + fwd progress below table

IMACS

Current:

• gui updates from vals over mavlink

Goals:

• Update gui ++ put more members on

Notes:

• Good proj to have, not enough “comp” tasks to give to everyone. IMACS good for getting new members to contribute to warg.

Airside system

Current:

Goal for this term:

• Flight test geolocation + estimation.

• Unsure if full airside system will be working before competition.

• Need to start working on integration tasks with geolocation.

  • can easily be thrown off by errors in system.

  • (probably req. lots of ft)

    • next ft: geolocation. Aiming to work w/team members to integrate.

    • Want to do ground test first, possible to ground test [anticiptaing february] + simulation.

      • once ground test working, can continue on to flight tests.

• Geolocation may not be ready for this comp, but important for future competitions.

FT timeline:

• expecting february

Pathing

• Need to test in sim, and then flight test.

• Task #2 working, working on dev. Task #1.

  • Not much progress on task #1. Could be tested on sim by april.

FT timeline:

• FT task #2 starting February

• FT Task #1 starting March

• Continuous flight testing in diff. conds over remain. ft’s

ML Model

• Bunch of rounds of data collection done

• Unclean data set ready

• Now needs to assign tasks out to clean up the data and annotating it on roboflow so model training can begin.

• Progress good, begin training model soon. data cleaning not expected to take too long.

  • Once dataset cleaned up, need to see how many images needed.

  • May want to ft more to collect more data for model.

FT timeline:

• Can ground test model by moving camera

• Plan is to integ w/airside system at mid-end february

  • possible to use last years model until then

  • Depends on LTE being ready.

• Continuous FT for image collection

LTE

• Able to stream drone telemetry to groundside

• Focus for this term: transmitting images from camera,

  • have started profiling different image compression formats. Trying to determine what is ideal

  • Purchase request for another pi to start testing what the code does on the rpi.

  • Once compression determined, create repository that runs on the rpi.

• Current plan (up for debate / changes)

  • Get messages from FC when mission is done

    • Done through dronekit - PR up, code is done and working on testing it with mission planner simulation. Should be done soon.

  • When done, start transmitting images over to groundside

    • Have proven possible, want to pick optimal compression.

  • Groundside will run & upload landing pad location to drone (telling it where to go)

    • Have determined possible to determine when mission is done (will send command to loiter over certain lat/lon)

      • Jetson → Pi → FC

FT Timeline:

• verify LTE works on ground (date: mid-feb)

• LTE ↔︎ Airside ↔︎ ML model ground (date: start of march)

• Fully integrated airside test (date: )

LTE + airside + ML model → complete autonomous landing task. worth 5 pt.

Task 1 code pathing → worth 15 pt. (approx)

• emphasize task 1 code to validate this for competition. more important for competition than the first 3 items. does this change timeline?

• task 2 highest priority for flight testing

• task 1 code priority over auto landing

Megans Questions

AEAC Sync

How do you like the format of AEAC sync? Is the content effective? useful?

• AEAC syncs go through a spectrum, mech → ee → efs → auto

  • most discussions that each subteams are having is good and productive

  • Wanted to suggest instead of going mech → ee → efs, could go the other way around

  • trying to get auto members to show up, but mech/ee/efs isn’t as important for them and auto members get bored.

    • can be a drag if you’re just a team member

• organize by projects instead?

  • better - > each subteam more involved with each section of the meeting

  • also helps PMs have more context related to integration

Leads meeting

Last term leads meeting was mostly admin/policy updates and became quick. Was that a reasonable format for leads meetings? Was that delivering what you thought leads meetings should be delivering? Is there anything you would’ve liked to change?

• Leads meetings were good, leads tend to be drawn into other meetings, keeping leads meeting short and concise is very helpful.

• Whenever there is discussion @ leads meeting it’s relevant and productive, really like the current leads meeting structure.

• Useful to hear about admin info.

Since a lot of leads / involved members go to AEAC sync, would you consider folding / mergeing AEAC & leads meetings together?

• No - aeac sync is important and can be very draining (heavily involved in a lot of technical discussions and problem solving). Booking another meeting after that would not be very productive

Do you think leads needs to be in person?

• Having the option is good, i.e. if people are working in the bay / campus and want to come in person it is good (for being social / cultural)

  • Depending on locations, schedules, should continue to hold it hybrid.

Director support

• For people not autonomy, autonomy system feels like a black box. Want to have people understand the autonomy system more, and not let it be a black box.

  • If anyone wants to know how autonomy system works (and not buzzword), more than happy to explain and make it understandable / approachable.

• Try and run socials!

• New leads for auto?

  • bringup 2 leads, mentor & onboard them.

  • become subteam advisors (want to try different roles/subteams).