Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
ELEV8 V3 Announced! — Parallax Forums

Comments

  • Solderless distro board is a nice touch!

    Is it possible to get just the FC?
  • PublisonPublison Posts: 12,366
    edited 2015-12-11 00:37
    xanadu wrote: »
    Solderless distro board is a nice touch!

    Is it possible to get just the FC?

    I hear tell separate components may be available Jan-Feb.
  • Yeah, it will be, but for the moment they're focusing on educational customers who will want the works. (possible alternate motive is recouping more of the development costs with the initial run)

    It's a nice kit - I was surprised at how many differences there were from the previous Elev8.
  • Cool! Congratulations Parallax and Jason!
  • Roger. My 450, Taranis and Xbees will love it :)
  • I'm very excited for this! It's a lot of money for a toy, but I think I'll be saving up for one! :D I love the idea of a Parallax-developed flight controller running on a Propeller and being able to tweak it myself!
  • DavidZemon wrote: »
    I'm very excited for this! It's a lot of money for a toy, but I think I'll be saving up for one! :D I love the idea of a Parallax-developed flight controller running on a Propeller and being able to tweak it myself!

    I guess I'm going to have to learn C to do any tweaking.

  • A toy??? I see it as a development platform; a safe harbor from which many journeys of exploration can launch!!!

    Something else to order and have shipped to work so the wife doesn't see the package arrive!!! :)
  • Publison wrote: »
    DavidZemon wrote: »
    I'm very excited for this! It's a lot of money for a toy, but I think I'll be saving up for one! :D I love the idea of a Parallax-developed flight controller running on a Propeller and being able to tweak it myself!

    I guess I'm going to have to learn C to do any tweaking.

    Most of the code is also available in SPIN - check GitHub.

    We switched to C in the closing phases of testing, but the earlier SPIN code was also rather complete. It's been a big project, so I've lost track of the plan regarding "syncing" code changes back to SPIN- but that might be on the menu. Regardless, the available SPIN code is probably usable, and most certainly "community" expandable.

    Enjoy!

  • I'm going to see how much effort it'll take to back-port the final changes to Spin, but even the C version should be easy enough to follow if you're comfortable with Spin. Most of the operators are identical, and the function form is similar, so although the syntax is different you should still find it fairly readable. A large chunk of the code is PASM, too (all the low-level sensor and driver stuff).

    The intention is for people to learn from it, so I've tried to comment well and keep it readable. There are parts of it that are going to be "black magic" without some math background, but even there I've tried to give references to net docs that explain concepts, and hope to provide some side documentation that explains those parts in more detail.

    My biggest concern with porting is that C typically compiles to faster code than Spin. I was able to leave 25% of the resources on the Prop for user code (8Kb ram, 2 cogs, and more than 25% of the main loop time remains). Spin will likely take a little less ram, but more cycles.
  • JasonDorie wrote: »
    My biggest concern with porting is that C typically compiles to faster code than Spin. I was able to leave 25% of the resources on the Prop for user code (8Kb ram, 2 cogs, and more than 25% of the main loop time remains). Spin will likely take a little less ram, but more cycles.

    This is so awesome. CONGRATULATIONS. It's nice to have a large, real-world project that shows C/C++ is a viable option on the Propeller.
    mindrobots wrote: »
    A toy??? I see it as a development platform; a safe harbor from which many journeys of exploration can launch!!!

    For all intents and purposes, I see it as a big kid version of legos :)
  • I have see with the APM controller that when the Piezo speaker is used that it causes interference with the flight controller, like the compass. With the current design it is located next to the sensors. Has this been tested?

    Mike
  • PublisonPublison Posts: 12,366
    edited 2015-12-19 17:11
    Good question. I think it is far enough away from the sensors, based on this photo:
    80204_RevA2_ProductionImage-02%20%284%29.jpg

    It should be mounted at the "Siren" placement.



  • Piezo isn't magnetic, so there's no conflict there. The current code doesn't actually implement a true compass based heading lock, but it's planned, and we did a bunch of testing of the mag sensor response with motors, bolts, etc. There was originally an actual speaker on there, and it was changed to a piezo to eliminate mag interference.
  • Good info, Jason.
  • Looks like the placement of the Piezo has changed on the final assembley:

    https://www.parallax.com/sites/default/files/downloads/80204-ELEV-8-Flight-Controller-Guide-v1.0.pdf

    As Jason indicated, it should not pose a problem with magnetics.
  • PublisonPublison Posts: 12,366
    edited 2015-12-20 16:01
    All the documents have been published. The build, firmware, drawings, Ground Station, etc.

    https://www.parallax.com/product/80300

    I will get mine late Tuesday, who will the be the first to build? :)


  • It shouldn't take nearly as long as a V1 or a V2 - they did a great job with this kit - there's a lot less soldering to do, and it goes together pretty quickly.

    I imagine I speak for everyone involved when I say I'm anxious for feedback (and hoping it's good). :)
  • JasonDorie wrote: »
    It shouldn't take nearly as long as a V1 or a V2 - they did a great job with this kit - there's a lot less soldering to do, and it goes together pretty quickly.

    I imagine I speak for everyone involved when I say I'm anxious for feedback (and hoping it's good). :)

    I just installed Ground Station on WIN10. Will have to wait for the hardware to see if communications happen.


  • JasonDorie wrote: »
    It shouldn't take nearly as long as a V1 or a V2 - they did a great job with this kit - there's a lot less soldering to do, and it goes together pretty quickly.

    I imagine I speak for everyone involved when I say I'm anxious for feedback (and hoping it's good). :)

    I'm thinking a three hour build for me. I have built a V1 and two V2's. Based on the build instructions, it looks looks like a walk in the park. :)
  • JasonDorieJasonDorie Posts: 1,930
    edited 2015-12-20 17:18
    Publison wrote: »
    I just installed Ground Station on WIN10. Will have to wait for the hardware to see if communications happens.

    I've run it on Win7 and 8, but haven't tried 10. Should be ok, but it's an unknown.
  • PublisonPublison Posts: 12,366
    edited 2015-12-20 17:20
    JasonDorie wrote: »
    Publison wrote: »
    I just installed Ground Station on WIN10. Will have to wait for the hardware to see if communications happen.

    I've run it on Win7 and 8, but haven't tried 10. Should be ok, but it's an unknown.
    I'll let you know on Tuesday. I want to test so I can include it in the build PDF document if it works correctly.

    EDIT: Will also check if the drivers will work with USB 3.0.
  • Does the new flight computer have any built in commands for piloting the drone?

    Commands like ascend, descend, move forward, hold position.
  • JasonDorieJasonDorie Posts: 1,930
    edited 2015-12-27 08:13
    Without GPS those are impossible, with the exception of ascend / descend. This is made to be piloted by a person. The flight controller stabilizes, but doesn't pilot for you.

    That said, there is a plan for a GPS add-on, at which point this kind of thing will very likely be possible, if not implemented for you. At the very least we want a "return home" feature, which would be relatively easy to re-purpose.
  • Question regarding the buzzer as it is mounted on the controller board and if the buzzer goes off it will cause vibrations and could effect the IMU's on the board.

    Mike
  • The buzzer is non-magnetic type, so in idle state does not influence the IMU's.

    Active state is controlled by the firmware, and thus readings from the IMU's can be ignored when the buzzer is sounding.

    Some options...

    If you are developing custom code around this board, and your application is concerned about the potential for PCB vibration caused by the on-board buzzer, then you might certainly consider ignoring IMU readings whilst the buzzer is operating. Or if your application requires it, remove the buzzer and have it mounted off-board.

    If you are working on a custom application, please do share details when you can! Very interesting.
  • iseries wrote: »
    Question regarding the buzzer as it is mounted on the controller board and if the buzzer goes off it will cause vibrations and could effect the IMU's on the board.

    Mike

    I believe the buzzer will only sound in flight when you use the battery monitor. You can turn it off in the Ground Station control panel. I will be using a seperate alarm:
    https://www.parallax.com/product/752-00014
    because it monitors each cell, and can be mounted where it will not affect the FC because of the isolation mounts.
  • The vibraton from the piezo is strong enough to register with the sensors, but it's just above the level of noise and doesn't negatively affect flight or control. I've flown a couple dozen batteries to completion with no issues.
  • JasonDorie wrote: »
    The vibraton from the piezo is strong enough to register with the sensors, but it's just above the level of noise and doesn't negatively affect flight or control. I've flown a couple dozen batteries to completion with no issues.

    Thanks for that feedback Jason. That's good to know.
Sign In or Register to comment.