-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
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
EKF Dynamics Update #2
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
For now, I chose to ignore merging-compatible modifications with PX4 main tree - but it could easily be done in this case. Just checking if this is the direction in which we want to go. Still requires updates on the EKF state (we don't need or want wind estimates, for instance) |
Probably a copy-paste on a new module?
This is configurable in upstream by PX4#22172, just FYI |
@@ -101,7 +99,7 @@ def predict_covariance( | |||
p = sf.V3(state[State.px], state[State.py], state[State.pz]) | |||
|
|||
q_new = q * sf.Quaternion(sf.V3(0.5 * d_ang_true[0], 0.5 * d_ang_true[1], 0.5 * d_ang_true[2]), 1) | |||
v_new = v + R_to_earth * d_vel_true + sf.V3(0 ,0 ,g) * dt |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you think it would be better to remove the position states completely from the estimates? or do we want this configurable?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I just removed the gravity component. But if we make it configurable then it can be user selected with a parameter on running the script.
Then perhaps we could even make a configuration to which dynamics we should use. It would make it more functional perhaps. |
Solved Problem
Attempt at fixing the EKF for microgravity dynamics.
Solution
For now purely deleting old solution, but can be made to accommodate in parallel.
Test coverage