not in the way I’d expected…
- using the finest level of data error checking, the numbers are huge – 36 errors during warm-up rising to 50 after the flight – some of these may actually not be a problem because Phoebe was stationary throughout; an error is spotted when the sensors partially read as 0xFFFF starting from the Z gyro, but for the Z-gyro, 0xFFFF = -1 = 0.008°/s
- the yaw angle read prior to takeoff is ridiculous – Phoebe doesn’t move throughout this flight, yet yaw says she span clockwise by 70° during the warm-up period!
- The IMU core temperature only varied by 0.02°C between boot-up and the end of the flight – this is a good thing and again suggests any temperature drift during a flight is due to breeze
The second is the only real problem as it will skew the initial angle calculations made during warm up; it also add this during flight but there isn’t the corresponding yaw it should introduce. I have to assume the yaw PID is doing its job well?.
Anyway, putting the protecting code back in place lead to this.
All’s looking a lot happier here.
The whole point of this is to try to compensate in software for the temperature drift during warm-up time, and afterwards when the props start spinning and the breeze cools the IMU back down; this was my speculation for why indoor flights don’t drift, but outdoor flights do. I think it worked but it was hard to just: comparing flights with and without boot-up prediction, the predictive code did seem to drift less, but both flights failed to reach their intended altitude, and the flights were both killed after a few seconds to stop Phoebe tripping over her toes. I’ll try later on in the day once the ambient temperature has risen about 10°C.
P.S. I don’t think there is a way to fix the height changes in different ambient temperatures – I think only an altimeter can sort that.