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

Fix gazebo-classic_iris_opt_flow not arming #22213

Closed

Conversation

GuillaumeLaine
Copy link
Contributor

Solved Problem

Enables the gazebo-classic_iris_optical_flow model to arm, which was currently impossible.
Previously make px4_sitl gazebo-classic_iris_opt_flow with commander arm would fail. Caused by the SITL and PX4Flow returning a 0 integration timespan before takeoff, which never summed to the desired publishing time delay and disabled publishing to vehicle_optical_flow. This caused preflight checks to fail.

Solution

Publishing frequency check now compares sensor time with last publication time instead of summing integration timespan

Changelog Entry

For release notes:

Bugfix: Fix a bug that prevented gazebo-classic_iris_optical_flow model from arming.

Alternatives

We could also alter the PX4Flow plugin to publish a sensor_optical_flow message with more meaningful/non-zero timespan.

@DanMesh DanMesh requested a review from bresch October 12, 2023 10:28
Copy link
Member

@bresch bresch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This might affect this fix: efbed3b
Because the integration timespan might be slightly different than the publishing rate.
@dagar is that acceptable? Or should we rather force a minimum publication rate?

@dagar
Copy link
Member

dagar commented Oct 17, 2023

So arguably the real problem here is the hack that was used historically to allow us to get a valid position estimate while on the ground with optical flow (and no current valid optical flow data).

Let's see if we can find an acceptable short term solution that doesn't backtrack on #22086. I think we could just handle this case a bit more explicitly in ekf2, but first we'll need to propagate something from sensors/vehicle_optical_flow.

@GuillaumeLaine GuillaumeLaine requested a review from dagar November 13, 2023 10:56
@GuillaumeLaine
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bresch @dagar Just a ping. Should we close this, review it, has it been resolved elsewhere?

@GuillaumeLaine
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing due to inactivity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants