Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 14 Next »

Out of scope for this test

  • Complete Pegasus 2 Tuning and be sure we are happy with the tune

    • We will not be doing this because it is risky and not really necessary right now.

    • Evaluate the tune we have right now

      • See how it feels with full stick reflections

    • Run autotune again on a higher aggressiveness

      • Last time we ran at 0.007 so maybe go up to 0.008 now that we’re more comfy with it

      • Hopefully less wind then last time

    • manually tune the rest

      • hoping this isnt really needed

      • oscillation => lower PID

      • slow response => increase PID

      • underdamped => increase P/D ratio

      • overdamped (motors heating up0 => decrease P/D ratio

Goals for this test

  • Complete a 1.5 km range test on Pegasus 2 to measure dropped packets

    • Do this without even flying the drone, put it in a car, drive it a kilometer down the road, measure packet loss.

    • Flying the drone is a risk

    • max distance we need at comp is 1.15 km

    • Can we make sure that when we do range tests, we log continuous data on both tx/rx side? Would be nice to know how our tpwr fluctuates as a f'n of distance

    • Can we try to test different antenna orientations? I.e. if we rotate the drone does it severely impact signal quality.

    • Can we try this test with/without other ELRS rx's active (maybe for ex: houston) near the pegasus basestation? I know they say elrs<->elrs interference is low but I want to see how low

  • Test the analog video system and relay system on Pegasus 2

    • Asana tasks to set this up

    • does not require flight, do at same time as mavlinkrc rank test

  • Test Geolocation system on Houston

    • Tasks in Asana to set this up

    • this will require

      • driving to wrestrc

      • Integrate and test hardware leading up to this

        • RPi integration

      • Autonomy preparation

        • Geolocation software exists and will be run on Houston

    • houston is ready for this test hardware wise

Attendees

Timeline Plan

  • Start charging batts at 9am

    • only charge one set of batts for Pegasus 2

  • Leave Bay 10am

  • Debrief starts at 1

  • Done 2pm

Debrief

Intro

Attendees:

Objective of debrief: diagnosing and resolving a few difficulties this flight test + the flight test preparation that resulted in not being able to fly today.

General

General topics - very loosely defined by Megan Spee , who was not actually at the flight test (and improved by Daniel Puratich who was)

  • Not enough preparation for this flight test

    • Houston configuration issues

      • houston was working last week but we wanted the rpi killswitch to work

        • params were changed to try to do this

        • changing these params broke the build and a motor would not spin

        • we were not able to resolve at flight line

      • parameters backups were either

        • not existent

        • not properly organized so we could find them

    • Peggy telemetry setup issues

      • didn’t know how to get ardupilot to connect to the controller for telemetry

      • spent 30 mins to get the controller to connect to drone at all

    • Unable to test auto code or ground test peggy as a result.

      • will need to redo this test, likely after midterms

  • systems integration / flight test operator / pilot knowledge base is lacking.

    • documentation does not exist. difficult to make this exist, because it’s related to:

      • ELRS (constantly changing)

      • Ardupilot (documentation already exists online for a lot of this, we don’t want to re-write for obsoletion)

      • things just change on the drones all the time and people don’t have time to keep up.

    • Houston and Peggy fly guides are out of date or unfinished.

    • controller inputs and curves are confusing and the documentation is out of date.

  • General sentiment of better-clarifying who is responsible for what at each flight test.

    • Changing around the flight test owners frequently so more people get exposure

    • Having experienced members walk newer pilots through these steps before being left to do these tasks by yourself.

    • you don’t know what you don’t know!

    • Directors should delegate the task management with PMs better to avoid overloading directors

      • Daniel had a busy week, missed comp arch sync

  • Couple thoughts on the fixed wing.

    • Evan (airframe lead) unable to attend fixed wing syncs to express concerns

      • ‘too late’ to fix a lot of design flaws

      • low confidence it will work well with the current manufacturing thoughts

Action Items

Action items following debrief:

  • Use the flight test attendee roles harder.

    • Ping people more leading up to the flight test.

    • Nothing is too overwhelming of a task for one person if you divide up the work enough.

  • All directors, pilots, flight test coordinators should take turns owning a flight test.

    • the admin overhead to make sure tasks are being done leading up to the FT and deciding what we need to do in prep for flight tests is a lot of effort, needs to be split around

  • Make sure knowledge transfer is happening.

    • Have more experienced members coach/work through the setup of peggy and houston before flight tests (ground tests), and at flight tests.

    • can also be aided by documentation.

      • Maybe some old operation guides for examples too.

    • letting people try things with supervision is important before they can do it on their own

  • No labels