New MK Firmware (Beta 0.91 as of 14.06.2013)

Discussion in 'Electronics' started by Steve Maller, Jun 19, 2013.

  1. Chris Fox

    Chris Fox Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages:
    463
    Likes Received:
    86
    Well on advice, I checked the soldering of the wires to the PDB after Andrew's event, and mine did not look as bad, however I attempted to reflow the solder, so I could rule out a similar type of failure. The question I have, is did I make it better or worse. I think better, but would like to know if I should redo any of the connections before reassembling.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Dave King

    Dave King Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,711
    Likes Received:
    311
    Looks real good. I only see 2 after shots but 4 before shots but from what I see its much better. Good job.
     
    Chris Fox likes this.
  3. Chris Fox

    Chris Fox Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages:
    463
    Likes Received:
    86
    thanks Dave, reassembling starts in the morning then
     
  4. Gary Haynes

    Gary Haynes Administrator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,211
    Likes Received:
    460
    Dave here's an update from Holger on the MK Forum. http://forum.mikrokopter.de/topic-43632.html

    That is strange, we do not observe synthesis problems with our MKs here.
    We are building quite a lot MikroKopter and all of them hold the GPS position perfectly without any tuning parameters. In almost all customer-MKs with GPS problem, we see the same Reasons: - compass calibration - compass influence by Lipo or cables - no GPS Shield Anyway, if you want to try an old FC firmware like 0.88, you do not have to remove the ACC sensor or the solder bridge . Just install the firmware. The new ACC signal will have no influence there. Regards,Holger
     
  5. Dave King

    Dave King Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,711
    Likes Received:
    311
    Gary thanks. I responded to that thread. I alos have posted the issue on 3 difference spots on the board and nobody from MK has responded in a 3 week time frame. If you look dig hard enough on board there are severl others on there that have posted about poor PH performance with 2.0 in addition to those on this board and that's just the english posts, not sure even what's being posted in German like the thread Holger responded to. In addition to the thread you pointed out here's one of them http://forum.mikrokopter.de/topic-post490733.html#post490733
    It would be nice if everyone that is having issues would post on the board so that Holger understands its not isolated to a couple users.
     
  6. Chris Fox

    Chris Fox Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2013
    Messages:
    463
    Likes Received:
    86
    Added to the mikrokopter forum ... In English but I reckon google translate will work translating my poor English into poorer German
     
  7. Dave King

    Dave King Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,711
    Likes Received:
    311
  8. Colin Snow

    Colin Snow Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    259
    Likes Received:
    26
    From this thread. I have the new ACC board on FC and just now updated from 0.90h to 0.91L (using file Flight-Ctrl_MEGA1284P_V0_91L_SVN_ACC-HH_MartinR). That required me to update to the new MKTool 2.00a and then Navi-Ctrl_STR9_V2_00a. I copied in my old settings manually and deleted the SETTINGS.INI file.

    I missed that 0.91J is in the tags/. It wasn't in branches/. What's the difference between those? Tags/ seems to hold everything, but branches/ not? Anybody know? (I work for a German software company, so if you tell me the reason is "over engineering" I will understand o_O )

    Even so after load and configuration 0.91L screens look just like 2.00a. That said, I cant figure out what values should be in Navi-Ctrl and Navi-Ctrl 2. Certainly not the same as what I had in 0.90h correct?

    Colin
     
  9. Andy Johnson-Laird

    Andy Johnson-Laird Administrator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2012
    Messages:
    10,366
    Likes Received:
    1,162
    Personally, I prefer to use the MK Tool "magnifying glass" tool to get a listing of the current "official" versions of the various firmware files. The problem with the Subversion Repository is that anyone can extract a version, tweak it, and put it back in to the repository -- you really don't know what's been done with a given version, how well it was tested, etc.

    Andy.
     
  10. Dave King

    Dave King Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,711
    Likes Received:
    311
    HI Colin​

    One question for you is why go to a beta version instead of directly to 2.0? IF I were you I would just upgrade to everything 2.0. I really don't think there's much difference between J and L that would cause any motor issues. When I was on the beta version of 91 I had 91L.​

    As far as your motor data, IN MY OPINION, I wouldn't read too much into the Motor data's differences. You can spin your tail and not get any where. Like Steve I used to pay very close attention to motor data too but after hundreds of hours flying I came to the conclusion that while motor data is important for diagnosis, it can also lead you to spin your tail over nothing. Here's how I look at motor data now. Once you plot your normal flying data (lets say 50 flights of data)you can reference it to new data to see if something has changed.​
    1. Any irregularities in the motor data compared to your reference data?2. Is there any one motor that sticks out such as too hot or drawing too much current? I use average temp and current not peaks because peaks can change if you hover rather easily.​
    3. Does one motor heat up much quicker than the others?​
    4. Is your GPS data good as far as magnetic field and inclination?5. Are you seeing any errors or red flags in the GPX files?​
    6. Does the I2C error counter go up in number while you have the copter in the air?​
    7. Are any of your motors very hot to the touch after landing?​
    8. Are you experiencing unwanted yaw?​

    If the answer is no to these questions your probably ok. Obviously you can put your mind at rest by looking for all the normal maintenance checks like motor bearings, bent shafts, and CG through MK tools). To me the differences between odd/even you see are exactly what Casey is referring to(to experiment with motor tilt to even out the motor data). Unless I am missing something and I know I could be, to me it sounds like your the perfect case of experimenting to see if the motor tilt helps your odd/even motor characterics.​
     
  11. Colin Snow

    Colin Snow Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    259
    Likes Received:
    26
    Thanks Dave. I'm going to give it a shot. Thanks for your posts above with screen shots of values. That helps. Will post back results here of upgrade test flight. I did not tilt motors yet so this will be with motors straight.

    Will reply to part two back on other thread.

    Colin

    Colin
     
  12. Colin Snow

    Colin Snow Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    259
    Likes Received:
    26
    I'm still shaking. That was the scariest flight I have had in long time. Winds were 5-7 mph. See attached PDF for the configuration settings I used.

    Problems encountered:
    1. Slight (4m) counter clockwise toilet bowl in PH and AH
    2. Major (10m+) counter clockwise toilet bowl after a 360 degree yaw to the left while in PH and AH. Same with yaw to the right.
    3. Fast decent rate (no AH)
    4. Minor nick and roll stick movement translated to large kopter movement. I have always used a 30% expo on Nick and Roll. But this was as if I had none.
    5. User error trying to stop the motors with the new two stick thing.
    Any of these settings look out of whack??

    Also, I got a 'NoSerialLink' NCFlag. Did I miss an MK Setting?

    Colin
     

    Attached Files:

  13. Andy Johnson-Laird

    Andy Johnson-Laird Administrator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2012
    Messages:
    10,366
    Likes Received:
    1,162
    Your experiences are consistent with some other folks who upgraded to 2.00 -- including me. I regressed back to 0.90j for those same reasons: toilet bowling and major uncommanded yaw twitching....

    Andy.
     
  14. Dave King

    Dave King Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,711
    Likes Received:
    311
    Colin if you haven't already, please post on the Mikrokopter forum about your experiences. The more people that can report these issues the sooner they can get corrected. By the way, your motor data looks better now. I would go back to 0.90J like the rest of us.
     
  15. Dave King

    Dave King Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,711
    Likes Received:
    311
  16. Gary Haynes

    Gary Haynes Administrator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,211
    Likes Received:
    460
    Use Google Chrome and it will automatically translate.
     
  17. Steve Maller

    Steve Maller UAV Grief Counselor

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,979
    Likes Received:
    807
  18. Steve Maller

    Steve Maller UAV Grief Counselor

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,979
    Likes Received:
    807
    BTW, one of the interesting things I've observed (and I should say, I'm quite happily running 2.00a on my Cinestar), is that sometimes engaging PH results in some swaying, but if I correct it manually for a few seconds, then I can let go of the sticks and it works great. Not sure I mentioned that before, or if it's at all relevant. But again, I have an Andy-advised CS8/MK build with the ACC upgrade, and have been very happy with AH and PH.
     
  19. Colin Snow

    Colin Snow Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    259
    Likes Received:
    26
    I reverted to 0.91J. Flight characteristics were all back to 'normal'. I used these settings (attached).

    However, as reported in the other thread I have the 'odd motor pull' problem back again. It makes me suspect that that the variance is software related - not hardware related. The only difference is between the two flights was the software version.

    If you see anything odd in the settings doc please let me know.

    Thanks

    Colin
     

    Attached Files:

  20. Dave King

    Dave King Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,711
    Likes Received:
    311
    I"m trying google chrome and its not translating automatically. Hmm....
     

Share This Page