On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 12:01:23 -0500 "Norman Vine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It is realy quite simple
you either have
1) an abstract class with 'Normalized units'
or 2) a bunch of specalized classes
Both schemes have advantages
Quick question Do valves take 1 or 2 full rotations of the handle to fully open ?
Yes, I agree that there are output (from the FDM perspective) parameters that operate on a 0 to 1 basis. Even in our aero coefficient specification, landing gear effects, for example, are based on a 0 to 1 range. Aerosurfaces are different, though. Plain flap deployment is referenced via angle. Even complex flap arrangements are referenced by angular measurement in degrees - I have not personally seen nor heard of flaps being referenced via a 0 to 1 normalized range. Spoilers also are referenced in degrees, from what I have seen (maybe Dave Culp can chime in here, and Tony). I think there is a use for both types of actuators, both linear and angular. I'd much rather see them referenced via native (or "more native") variables.
Also, again your (valve) example is for an input control, not an output control that is fully defined by a subsystem (FDM). We (FDM) take normalized joystick inputs (0 to 1) because there are many joystick types and it makes sense to accept a zero or 1 and turn that into the value we need. We have control over that. We don't need to add special code for that. But our output for aerosurfaces is (like I said before) in the lowest common denominator value when we can ship it out - in degrees.
_______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d