Some do the rotations by spinning themselves with the AC held out in their arms. That's not the best approach.
Yet it works absolutely perfectly and is what the DJI diagrams show...
Some do the rotations by spinning themselves with the AC held out in their arms. That's not the best approach.
Interesting. The picture in Go4 shows the mavic first ‘flat’ then on its side. NOT pointing up or down. But the text says ‘vertical’. Which implies up or down Like you say! Is the picture wrong?Put it this way:
First part of compass calibration is on the yaw axis with AC in normal flight position.
Second part of calibration is in roll axis with AC pointed up as if it were a rocket. Pointing down should also be OK.
Some do the rotations by spinning themselves with the AC held out in their arms. That's not the best approach.
Yep, YouTube guys also does it ‘flat’ then ‘sideways’ like the picture shows. Not pointing camera up or down...Put it this way:
First part of compass calibration is on the yaw axis with AC in normal flight position.
Second part of calibration is in roll axis with AC pointed up as if it were a rocket. Pointing down should also be OK.
Some do the rotations by spinning themselves with the AC held out in their arms. That's not the best approach.
And here (newest Spark version for stage two)Put it this way:
First part of compass calibration is on the yaw axis with AC in normal flight position.
Second part of calibration is in roll axis with AC pointed up as if it were a rocket. Pointing down should also be OK.
Some do the rotations by spinning themselves with the AC held out in their arms. That's not the best approach.
Not "best" approach why? If it comes down to your personal preference as the consideration that is irrelevant.Put it this way:
First part of compass calibration is on the yaw axis with AC in normal flight position.
Second part of calibration is in roll axis with AC pointed up as if it were a rocket. Pointing down should also be OK.
Some do the rotations by spinning themselves with the AC held out in their arms. That's not the best approach.
Not "best" approach why? If it comes down to your personal preference as the consideration that is irrelevant.
We should expect a reasonably uniform field if the calibration is performed in an appropriate location though shouldn’t we? At least good enough to allow for any contribution of ferromagnetic components forming part of the drone. That is, as I understand it, the intent of calibration. I have experienced the effect of calibrating in a poor environment (over reinforced concrete cricket pitch being one example) and expect both methods may have had similar, if not identical, outcomes.The disadvantage of rotating while holding the aircraft at arms length is that the magnetometers are not simply rotating in the external field - they are also translating. If the external field is uniform then that won't matter, but it introduces the risk of varying the external field that the calibration algorithm assumes to be constant.
We should expect a reasonably uniform field if the calibration is performed in an appropriate location though shouldn’t we? At least good enough to allow for any contribution of ferromagnetic components forming part of the drone. That is, as I understand it, the intent of calibration. I have experienced the effect of calibrating in a poor environment (over reinforced concrete cricket pitch being one example) and expect both methods may have had similar, if not identical, outcomes.
Thanks SAR. That’s is simply my point.Yes - in most locations it should make no difference at all.