He was asking about TeleMini specifically, which only has barometric
sensor, no accelerometers.

Looks like a textbook flight there.

-bryan

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Eric Weder <[email protected]> wrote:

> If it ain't broke don't "fix" it by wasting code on superstitions. If the
> Telemini code uses the same algorithms as Telemetrum, I'd say you have it
> covered.
>
> I flew my Telemetrum last July 1 to 375 m/s (Mach 1.1), with no problems.
> It
> was backing up my Raven2, and did a fine job. What a stress-reliever it was
> to know that deployment was successful while the rocket was 5 km overhead,
> and that it would be easy to find it again even if we didn't see it come
> down. Don't know if this list allows attachments, I've included a PDF of
> the
> flight results and my .eeprom file.
>
> Regards,
> Eric
>
> Eric Weder
> [email protected]
> T +1(403)337-1965 | M +1(403)863-9617
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Keith Packard
> Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2012 22:21
> To: DK Duncan; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [altusmetrum] Telemini mach delay/kalman filter
>
> <#part sign=pgpmime>
> On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 20:18:12 -0700, DK Duncan <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Right, but the telemetrum has an accelerometer as well as a pressure
> > transducer.
>
> TeleMetrum logs all of its raw sensor data, which means we can use that to
> check the algorithms on the ground. We used all of this data to verify that
> the Kalman-filter based mach-inhibit algorithm correctly detects when the
> airframe is experiencing mach transition effects.
>
> So, in effect, "TeleMini" has flown faster than mach dozens of times, but
> the code was run on recorded data and not in actual flight.
>
> What the flight computer does is compare the barometric data with the
> obvious physics model for a rocket in ballistic flight by looking at the
> error term in the Kalman filter. When they agree, the computer arms the
> apogee charge. When they don't agree, the altimeter inhibits the apogee
> charge. This error term varies by a factor of 100 between ballistic and
> non-ballistic flight, which gives us a strong signal for this technique.
>
> > I'll be pushing mach 1.5 this summer and I want redundant altimeters.
> > The telemini should be a good way to do that provided it will handle
> > mach transitions well.
> >
> > I'm hoping someone here has tested it in flight at those velocities.
>
> I've got two near mach flights, one to 317m/s (as measured by Tm), and one
> to 325m/s (as simulated; the rocket was lost due to a power failure at
> apogee). Tm worked flawlessly in both cases.
>
> We'll be doing a more testing this year, to see if there's any issue with
> the Kalman filter not detecting mach transitions correctly. I just need to
> make some time to build more little airframes for testing with TeleMini
> hardware.
>
> We could obviously add a mach delay setting to Tm's configuration; I
> suspect
> it might make people more comfortable than trusting some fancy computer
> software.
>
> -keith
> _______________________________________________
> altusmetrum mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gag.com/mailman/listinfo/altusmetrum
>
> _______________________________________________
> altusmetrum mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gag.com/mailman/listinfo/altusmetrum
>
>
_______________________________________________
altusmetrum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gag.com/mailman/listinfo/altusmetrum

Reply via email to