You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently the crazyflie-firmware controllers have quite a fixed timing that is very specific to the firmware and hardware alone. We have noticed some issues when using the python bindings in the simulator, that the behavior is not exactly the same as on the real drone.
This will probably need some rewrite of the controller framework if we can't find a simple solution for it. However this issue is to remind us to look at this at one point as uses of the Webots simulator has been questioning its performance: bitcraze/crazyflie-simulation#48.
Also for Crazyswarm2 this is an important thing to fix at one point.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
All the underlying functions are very much assuming that the whole loop runs at a 1000 hertz... but is that still the case? shouldn't both the estimator and controllers be reliant on the actual time now?
Currently the crazyflie-firmware controllers have quite a fixed timing that is very specific to the firmware and hardware alone. We have noticed some issues when using the python bindings in the simulator, that the behavior is not exactly the same as on the real drone.
This will probably need some rewrite of the controller framework if we can't find a simple solution for it. However this issue is to remind us to look at this at one point as uses of the Webots simulator has been questioning its performance: bitcraze/crazyflie-simulation#48.
Also for Crazyswarm2 this is an important thing to fix at one point.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: