Re: [Paparazzi-devel] barometer or not?

[Vassilis V.]

My 2c for the barometer, I used the ETS sensor and not the SCP1000 but  
they should behave similarly.
- You will have to update the Kalman parameters very likely, the ones  
used for the SCP1000 did not work for me (too much filtering and lag).  
I updated SVN with what currently works fairly well for my setup (see  
R and SIGMA2 constants in baro_ets.c).
- The altitude loops are updated at 4Hz, to get the full benefits of  
the barometric sensor we should update at 10Hz or more. I have not  
made that change yet in the code, I am still running at 4Hz.

Vassilis


On Nov 1, 2009, at 12:19 PM, antoine drouin wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Chris <address@hidden> wrote:
> > I just finished rewriting all the SCP1000 files including the use  
> > of the
> > barometer as an alternative altimeter for the autopilot.
> > The files affected are the baro_scp.x ,estimator.x and main_ap.x
> > In simulation it works fine but i was wondering if the reading of  
> > this
> > barometer are more accurate than the gps altitude especially know  
> > with EGNOS
> > support.
> > Any opinions?
>
> It's not so much about accuracy than latency. GPS is filtered, so
> lagging badly and also low bandwidth.
> You have some GPS/baro data recorded from a couple of years ago in the
> svn in the sw/in_progress/barometer directory if you wanna plot or
> play with filters
>
> > I am also writing some new files for the  SRF08  for use in auto  
> > landings
> > now that after my heart problems i got me a nice two months leave.
>
> I never got anything interesting from a ultrasonic sensor on fast
> moving vehicles  (read fixed wing)
>
> Regards
>
> Poine
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel