More specific Airframe type support for better Airframe Reference #19686
Conversation
|
@sfuhrer Any idea for a better @type for the Convergence airframe? https://github.com/PX4/PX4-Autopilot/blob/master/ROMFS/px4fmu_common/init.d/airframes/13012_convergence#L5 |
Not really, currently we don't have a way to indicate the number of motors of a tiltrotor. Given that we want to purge most of the airframes once we have control allocation in place (see #19596 (comment)), I wonder how much effort it is worth to spend on this front. The idea is that we only keep a very small selection of pre-configured airframes and otherwise let users define their own airframe with the new allocation UI in QGC. |
|
This would be a useful refactor in preparation for the upcoming Frame component metadata generation in PX4 side. It is just renaming / making the script more human readable, so no functional changes. Could we get this in? @bkueng |
Tools/px4airframes/srcparser.py
Outdated
|
|
||
| def GetName(self): | ||
| """ | ||
| Get parameter group name | ||
| Get parameter group type |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you fix the whole comment? parameter -> airframe
And why does GetName return type?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure! That's also what I wondered back then I think 😆
This script in general has bad naming conventions / implicit, but I will go over them again
junwoo091400
force-pushed
the
pr_airframe_parser_improvements
branch
from
25ad074
to
1443f68
Compare
The srcparser.py is specific to each use case (e.g. Airframes, Parameters, px4events, etc as in Tool/* folders). Therefore it is confusing to have the px_process_airframes.py script handle concept of airframes under the generic name 'params'. This improves readability and sets the baseground for implementing more specific vehicle type supports, as mentioned in PX4/PX4-user_guide#1858 (comment)
junwoo091400
force-pushed
the
pr_airframe_parser_improvements
branch
from
1443f68
to
31d7418
Compare
|
Had rebase error, now properly fixed! |
Describe problem solved by this pull request
As discussed in the Actuators Document Improvement PR in User Guide: PX4/PX4-user_guide#1858 (comment), the current airframe reference document doesn't separate out the airframes accurately.
For example, the 'VTOL Tiltrotor' Airframe Reference has a 6-rotor VTOL diagram that doesn't match with the E-Flite Convergence, that is currently under the same "type" in the doc.
Describe your solution
TODOs
Test data / coverage
Tested functionality of the
px_process_airframes.pyscript by:make airframe_metadatacommandAdditional context
🤞 If there are any other airframes that are not true to the airframe type diagram in the Airframe Reference, please let me know so that I can add the appropriate @type attribute to those airframes!