Yes with a mavic pro you can wave a magnet in front and behind and see either compass 1 or compass 2 go crazy. It would be easy to do this magnet test with an Air, unfortunately I don't have an Air myself to test it.
Yes with a mavic pro you can wave a magnet in front and behind and see either compass 1 or compass 2 go crazy. It would be easy to do this magnet test with an Air, unfortunately I don't have an Air myself to test it.
It is for posters like this they provide an ignore option, antagonistic troll.Interesting thought. But as you'll see above, I didn't attack anyone - merely stated the truth. Then it's him who attacked my statement with falsehood. Doesn't matter if someone is highly skilled or even the president, if they use falsehood to make incorrect claims, they are still wrong.
It is for posters like this they provide an ignore option, antagonistic troll.
Agree and disagree. Just because he is fixed in his belief, be it right or wrong, this has created a positive flow of information I am curious to see it play out.It is for posters like this they provide an ignore option, antagonistic troll.
I was working from mobile DATs in all the recent MA cases - they contain all the necessary data.
The vision-based compass is interesting - I guess they have traded components for added computational complexity, which suggests that processing power is not a limiting factor. But the issue remains as to the nature of the m1 data and whether or not it is from a "vision compass" or a second magnetometer - why would the IMU or FC go to the trouble of disguising vision-based yaw data as 3-D magnetic field data? I'll see if I can make some enquiries directly with DJI.
Agree and disagree. Just because he is fixed in his belief, be it right or wrong, this has created a positive flow of information I am curious to see it play out.
Stimmy @sar104 is having difficulty with a FCT, so if you could conduct a quick one and upload the data....most appreciated... ()As a consistent lurker I just wanted to peek out of the shadows and say thanks to sar104 for some great info here. I also have a Mavic Air, so if you need any specific tests done with flight logs attached please let me know. For science of course.
DJI has responded in at least a couple of forum threads on their site stating that the Mavic Air has dual IMU and a compass. If it had two actual compass modules, you can be sure they'd be mentioning it somewhere in the specs or in their forum replies. Now the elusive "vision compass" is a bit of an unknown, but it seems clear that it's not an actual standard compass module replicant. Maybe it's just as useful, maybe it's better than having two identical compasses, or maybe it's not. Maybe the vision compass is an improvement over the Mavic Pro's, or maybe the Pro's is still better. We can speculate about a lot of things.
I cannot vouch for the authenticity of DJI's responses or the knowledge of their employees (or forum administrators), but here are a couple of threads where it seems clear they are acknowledging there is but one actual compass:
Dual compass Mavic Air (DJI Thor)
Mavic Air - Dual IMU and Compass? (DJI Elektra)
How many IMU's and Compass has the new Mavic Air? (Same as above)
Now then, whether or not the Mavic Air has two compass modules or not is a great investigative exercise, but isn't the important question whether or not having two compass modules would have made a difference in this particular case? Did the compass actually fail, or was the compass simply wrong because of magnetic interference? If the compass failed (meaning, either a hardware failure or a software error), then having a secondary compass may have prevented the incident. However, if the compass was influenced by an external force (as evidenced by an improper compass heading), wouldn't it be safe to assume it likely would have affected both compasses in a similar (if not identical) way? I'll leave that one up to the experts because I honestly don't know.
I would, gladly, but I'm packing today for a 12-day trip to southern UT & northern AZ. If no one does it sooner, I'll do the test on my return.Nor do I. Volunteers?
Just a thought on vision compass...
I wonder on start-up the two IMUs are synced to the magnetic compass, as long as the magnetic compass is healthy. I assume the software can use the cameras to determine roll and pitch if they can locate the horizon in the images. The bottom camera compare images for changes on the ground for yaw.
I suppose a quick test is to have the MA hover in front of a pic with a horizon, and then roll the pic to see if the IMU1 value changes.
But then, if you are flying between trees, the vision compass would be compromised.
I was speculating the same over onWhat's interesting about this event (at least to me) is that there is no evidence that the compass provided incorrect data.
In the DAT file records for the two IMUs, computing pitch, roll and yaw from the individual quaternions gives the orientation of the aircraft as determined by those IMUs.
View attachment 35064
The pitch and roll data from the two IMUs are in broad agreement for the first 40 s or so of the record, although they diverge somewhat after that. However, even though they are receiving identical magnetometer data, they initialize at different yaw values - IMU0 at 168° and IMU1 at 57°. And neither of those is the orientation recalled by the OP (220° = -140°). Comparison with the recorded flight yaw values shows that IMU0 was the active IMU.
However, if we take the actual recorded magnetometer data and compute yaw from that, using the pitch and roll data from the two IMUs, then we can compare the magnetic yaw from the two IMUs with the IMU yaw. Since they are using the same magnetometer data and agree, initially, on pitch and roll, those two computed magnetic yaws should be similar.
View attachment 35065
And that is what we see - the two IMU magnetic yaws agree until the pitch and roll values diverge. More notably, however, the computed magnetic yaw is completely different from both IMU0 yaw and IMU1 yaw and, in fact, agrees with the OP's recollection of the orientation and the orientation that explained the aircraft's flight path. The magnetic yaw starts at -130° (= 230°).
So the magnetometer data, even though just from one magnetometer, look to be correct, but both IMUs are ending up with wildly incorrect yaw values. That looks potentially like a problem, or possibly a bug(?), in the IMUs themselves.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.