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

Feature/357 update thr firing remainder module #129

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Sep 9, 2023

Conversation

JulianHammerl
Copy link
Collaborator

  • Tickets addressed: Confluence 357
  • Review: By commit
  • Merge strategy: Merge (no squash)

Description

The logic of the first module call was changed. Now, the only difference between the first module call and all subsequent calls is the computation of the control period (fsw rate). The remaining module code is now always executed (also for first call), so any center of mass offset information coming from the THRArrayCmdForceMsg is now always considered.

Verification

The UnitTest was updated accordingly.

Documentation

The documentation was updated accordingly.

Future work

None.

@JulianHammerl JulianHammerl added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 14, 2023
@JulianHammerl JulianHammerl self-assigned this Aug 14, 2023
@JulianHammerl JulianHammerl force-pushed the feature/357-update-thrFiringRemainder-module branch 2 times, most recently from 888151f to f586831 Compare August 17, 2023 14:21
Copy link
Collaborator

@thibaudteil thibaudteil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good

@codyallard28
Copy link
Collaborator

@JulianHammerl, should the commit that defaulted the timestep to 2. even show up in the history? I am not an expert on interactive rebasing or atomic commits... so this is purely a question.

@JulianHammerl
Copy link
Collaborator Author

JulianHammerl commented Aug 26, 2023

@JulianHammerl, should the commit that defaulted the timestep to 2. even show up in the history? I am not an expert on interactive rebasing or atomic commits... so this is purely a question.

@codyallard28 I decided against squashing these commits together because the purpose of the first commit is to include the module logic into the first time step, and the purpose of the second commit is to make the time step of 2 seconds changeable. I am happy to squash them together though if desired @patkenneally

Copy link
Collaborator

@patkenneally patkenneally left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Legend:
🔻 Issues to address before merge
🔶 Requests that should not block merge, but should at least be discussed
🔵 Recommendations that can be ignored if desired

@JulianHammerl JulianHammerl force-pushed the feature/357-update-thrFiringRemainder-module branch 2 times, most recently from fb28e06 to 7a1c5c1 Compare September 5, 2023 14:40
The first time the module is called, there is no information on the control period.
In the past, the module would simply turn all thrusters on or off depending on baseThrustState,
which could lead to undesired behavior because the remaining logic of the module is skipped
(which takes into account COM offsets via the THRArrayCmdForceMsg).
The only difference between the first and all other time steps is the unknown control period,
so now the control period is simply set to 2 seconds for the first time step, while still
executing the rest of the module.
@patkenneally patkenneally force-pushed the feature/357-update-thrFiringRemainder-module branch from 7a1c5c1 to 00e4771 Compare September 9, 2023 04:41
@patkenneally patkenneally merged commit fcf9b58 into develop Sep 9, 2023
2 checks passed
@patkenneally patkenneally deleted the feature/357-update-thrFiringRemainder-module branch September 9, 2023 05:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants