-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.8k
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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
MANUAL_CONTROL: Redefine the use of z
(throttle) to be independent to vehicle's thrust direction
#1922
Open
junwoo091400
wants to merge
1
commit into
mavlink:master
Choose a base branch
from
junwoo091400:pr_manual_control_z_throttle_redefinition
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
MANUAL_CONTROL: Redefine the use of z
(throttle) to be independent to vehicle's thrust direction
#1922
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
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.
Not sure about this. Before we were saying its another slider, now we're enforcing that the alignment of that slider is "up/down". I think the desired change is just to remove the emphasis on the positive/negative thrust. Something like.
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.
Conceptually it should represent an analog input axis be it slider, stick axis or whatever else someone would like to map. In most cases, it will be a stick axis which might be worth mentioning but certainly not enforcing.
My wording is not general enough. I do not want to enforce that. The axis just needs to have a minimum and maximum if that's up, down, sideways or diagonal is up to the user. Again in most cases, I'm pretty sure it's up and down.
That is exactly the part that is in my eyes only half the story. Manual up, forward, gas is the first thing that comes to mind but often it's mapped to steer vertical or even horizontal speed. I'd try to avoid mentioning an exact use because even though it's true in certain scenarios it can be very confusing in others.
Very good wording. Whatever the thrust, speed or other desired quantity range is, should be mapped to the full available input range -1000 to 1000.
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.
@MaEtUgR No, that's good wording ^^^ :-)
Perhaps we should make it that simple?
Similar changes could be made to the other axes