Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Maximum numbers of connected ESCs in uORB and in UAVCAN expanded to 16. #12277

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

irsdkv
Copy link
Contributor

@irsdkv irsdkv commented Jun 14, 2019

Describe problem solved by the proposed pull request
At this time maximum number of supported ESC is 8.
This restriction does not meet modern requirements.
For example, some VTOLs could have 8 motors for MC mode and one or more push/pull motors for FW mode.

Test data / coverage
It was tested on real VTOL with 8 MC motors and one push FW motor (with Pixhawk 4 onboard).
The flying plan included MC mode and FW mode.
The flight went well, without any lags or problems.

Describe your preferred solution
Increase maximum number of connected ESC in uORB messages and in UAVCAN ESC driver.

Additional context
This PR also associated with this task as it allow to use VTOL copters with more than 8 motors in simulator.

@irsdkv irsdkv changed the title Maximum numbers of connected ESC expanded to 16. Maximum numbers of connected ESCs in uORB and in UAVCAN expanded to 16. Jun 14, 2019
@irsdkv irsdkv force-pushed the pr-16_esc_over_uavcan branch 3 times, most recently from 2e113ef to 72487ce Compare June 15, 2019 17:36
@dagar
Copy link
Member

dagar commented Jun 15, 2019

One minor concern is the size of esc_status. We should probably restructure this at some point to publish the individual status messages with identifiable information.

I'd love to see a log if you're able to share it (logs.px4.io).

// but this driver could well serve multiple groups.
unsigned num_outputs_max = 8;
unsigned num_outputs_max = (
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why is this necessary?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@irsdkv irsdkv Jun 15, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You are right. I'm not sure about the need for this check.
Perhaps the best solution would be to assign the constant value 16 (esc_status_s::CONNECTED_ESC_MAX).
But, on the other hand, I did not want to bind to a constant, which in the distant future could still change.
If you think that the constant value would be better, I will be glad to change this check to constant value.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think that the constexpr specifier solve all problems with CPU load and this check (CONNECTED_ESC_MAX constant presence) will be useful for further changes safety.

Maximum numbers of connected ESCs in uORB and
in UAVCAN expanded to 16.
@irsdkv irsdkv force-pushed the pr-16_esc_over_uavcan branch from 72487ce to c18c9d0 Compare June 15, 2019 17:47
@irsdkv
Copy link
Contributor Author

irsdkv commented Jun 15, 2019

I'd love to see a log if you're able to share it (logs.px4.io).

Sure! We will provide the logs next week.

@LorenzMeier
Copy link
Member

@irsdkv Could you please share the logs?

@irsdkv
Copy link
Contributor Author

irsdkv commented Jun 25, 2019

@irsdkv Could you please share the logs?

Sorry for delay! Our pilot is on vacation now. We will provide logs as fast as we can. I suppose that logs will be available at the beginning of July.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Sep 23, 2019

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Dec 22, 2019

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. Thank you for your contributions.

@julianoes
Copy link
Contributor

What's the status here? @irsdkv is this still something you would like to get in or should it be closed?

@stale stale bot removed the stale label Jan 30, 2020
@irsdkv
Copy link
Contributor Author

irsdkv commented Jan 30, 2020

I would like to get it, but we still have not pilot and unfortunately at this time we can't provide the logs.

Arch was changed after creating this PR so I think we should close it.

I will create new request when we will ready.

@irsdkv irsdkv closed this Jan 30, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants