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

PX4 v1.13 MAVLink parachute support #1943

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 27, 2022
Merged

PX4 v1.13 MAVLink parachute support #1943

merged 2 commits into from
Jul 27, 2022

Conversation

hamishwillee
Copy link
Collaborator

@hamishwillee hamishwillee commented Jul 13, 2022

This updates parachute support docs for MAVLink and (partially) for actuators.

It follows on from the work in PX4/PX4-Autopilot#18589



### MAVLink Parachute Setup

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@hamishwillee hamishwillee Jul 13, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@ThomasDebrunner @MaEtUgR Can you please check this section.

I've looked at the code in PX4/PX4-Autopilot#18589 and I want to confirm my understanding

The big picture is clear - the MAV_CMD_DO_PARACHUTE is emitted if the parachute is detected and healthy on failsafe. The COM_PARACHUTE parameter is checked an will warn if a parachute is expected but not present/healthy.

The small picture is less clear:

  • PX4 appears to base its health checks on getting the heartbeat - that then sets SYS_STATUS.onboard_control_sensors_present_extended and .onboard_control_sensors_health_extended for the recovery system bit. Is that right?
  • What about the enabled flag? (onboard_control_sensors_enabled_extended) - doesn't seem to be set. I would kind have expected enabled to be based on the COM_PARACHUTE parameter.
  • I guess we're assuming that a parachute is always "in a good state". Otherwise we need a mechanism for it to actually tell the flight stack it is OK.
  • What is COM_PARACHUTE supposed to do other than be a trigger for sending events when the heartbeat is lost?
  • Should COM_PARACHUTE be set for a PWM parachute? In this case how would you know if it is "healthy" etc? Presumably you will still want to emit this info for a GCS?
  • Is the MAV_CMD_DO_PARACHUTE sent to the specific component that emits the MAV_TYPE_PARACHUTE? What if two are connected? Or is it just sent to current system ID and component 0 (broadcast).
  • Is the MAV_CMD_DO_PARACHUTE command forwarded? i.e. can a GCS trigger the parachute? Should it?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Merging as this is, I think correct. I still need the detail in ^^^ and that request is tracked in #1977

@hamishwillee hamishwillee marked this pull request as ready for review July 21, 2022 05:53
en/peripherals/parachute.md Show resolved Hide resolved
en/peripherals/parachute.md Show resolved Hide resolved
MAVLink parachute support is enabled by setting the parameter [COM_PARACHUTE=1](../advanced_config/parameter_reference.md#COM_PARACHUTE).
PX4 will then indicate parachute status using the [MAV_SYS_STATUS_RECOVERY_SYSTEM](https://mavlink.io/en/messages/common.html#MAV_SYS_STATUS_RECOVERY_SYSTEM) bit in the [SYS_STATUS](https://mavlink.io/en/messages/common.html#SYS_STATUS) extended onboard control sensors fields:
- `SYS_STATUS.onboard_control_sensors_present_extended`: MAVLink parachute present (based on heartbeat detection).
- `SYS_STATUS.onboard_control_sensors_enabled_extended`: ?
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Used?

@hamishwillee hamishwillee merged commit 883ad47 into main Jul 27, 2022
@hamishwillee hamishwillee deleted the v1_13_parachute branch July 27, 2022 07:10
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.

2 participants