Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Custom rotor precision #69

Closed
bjorgan opened this issue Apr 25, 2017 · 1 comment
Closed

Custom rotor precision #69

bjorgan opened this issue Apr 25, 2017 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@bjorgan
Copy link
Member

bjorgan commented Apr 25, 2017


~~~s/precision/resolution/~~~

Current behavior is that new position commands are sent only when round(angle) differs from round(previous_angle). This makes position updates kind of rate-limited, down to position differences of approximately 1 degree in either direction, not exactly precision or resolution-limited or time-limited. Numerical precision is kept, and the precision of the sent angle is limited by the rotor controller, not flyby. 

The commands were probably originally rate-limited in this way because rotor positioning, screen updates and keyboard input are all done in the same thread with blocking with timeout on `getch()`, which would, without rate-limiting, otherwise make rotor positioning happen more frequently if the user were to press a key.

The way this is done is not really problematic, the larger problem with the rotor controlling is that the antenna always will lag behind the assumed position of the satellite, which should be fixed by predicting rotor angles in advance.

@oyvkar had problems with a specific rotor, where it started vibrating wildly if it got position updates with angle differences of less than 4 degrees in either direction. This issue was mainly made to work around that (but also laid on the shelf for a bit since he moved on to use other tools and had other quickfixes around the problems with configuration of rotctld itself). Could still be useful to have better control over the rate-limiting. Also related to #70.
@bjorgan
Copy link
Member Author

bjorgan commented Nov 25, 2017

This is not a real issue, more a thing to keep in mind, so closing in favor of #76 and #70.

@bjorgan bjorgan closed this as completed Nov 25, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant