Update thruster documentation

[joaogvcarneiro]

• Tickets addressed: Update thruster documentation #518
• Review: By commit
• Merge strategy: Merge (no squash)

Description

Added a paragraph that explains how some instances of _B in message variables actually denote _F.

Verification

N/A.

Documentation

See description.

Future work

N/A.

[schaubh]

I pushed some suggested edits to the documentations. I feel we should be more explicit here in what is happening under the hood, and explain better that _B is technically correct, as both output solutions have the 3 variables in the body frame. We just have two body-fixed frames to consider.

Further, I also state that this is only applicable currently to prescribed motion effectors. Please look over, edits if needed, and merge with your commit to do a revision review of this PR.

Also, this PR should be rebased before being put up for review :-)

[joaogvcarneiro]

Thanks for taking a look @schaubh! I missed that this wasn't on top of the latest develop branch.

I'm wondering if it's a good idea or not to make it specific in the documentation that this only applies to the prescribedMotionStateEffector. I know that from a dynamics standpoint, this approach is only true for prescribed bodies, but you can technically attach the thruster to any type of effector. What do you think about making this point a little more explicit?

[schaubh]

Let’s make it explicit for that that it only work with this one effector. Blue skies, Dr. Schaub [http://hanspeterschaub.info/pics/AVSlogo5-Email.png] Hanspeter Schaub, Ph.D. Schaden Leadership Chair Professor and Chair of Smead Aerospace Engineering Sciences Department LASP Senior Associate for Engineering Research and Education Director of the Autonomous Vehicle Systems (AVS) Laboratory Fellow of AIAA and AAS Address: Aerospace Engineering Sciences (ASEN) Department Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research (CCAR) 3775 Discovery Drive, 429 UCB University of Colorado Boulder, CO 80303-0429 Office: AERO 224N Phone: +1 (303) 492-2767 Email: ***@***.******@***.***> Web: http://hanspeterschaub.info<http://hanspeterschaub.info/> On Dec 4, 2023, at 19:39, João Vaz Carneiro ***@***.***> wrote:  Thanks for taking a look @schaubh<https://github.com/schaubh>! I missed that this wasn't on top of the latest develop branch. I'm wondering if it's a good idea or not to make it specific in the documentation that this only applies to the prescribedMotionStateEffector. I know that from a dynamics standpoint, this approach is only true for prescribed bodies, but you can technically attach the thruster to any type of effector. What do you think about making this point a little more explicit? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#524 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AVGSPDLPPHOLV4BSMGAN3DLYH2CNZAVCNFSM6AAAAABAG2XGTKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQMZZHEYDCNBVGA>. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[schaubh]

Good to go.