Labroides
Core User of DJI
Flight distance : 9991457 ft
Australia
Offline
|
120ccpm Posted at 3-9 20:53
Thanks for the threads. Let me just note that even SAR104 (I remember him from my Phantom Pilots days, the other guy I don't), in the first thread you mentioned, doesn't say "it's a fact" or compares that to the Earth being flat, but rather questions the distance-based recalibration and says it "makes no sense to me under any obvious hypothesis". He continues and says "I had been working on the assumption that it was basically an abundance of caution rather than a well thought out requirement.". Same goes for BudWalker, who talks about his "theory". They have reached their conclusions, but I would be surprised if they would not be open to other interpretations.
Speaking of which, I'll try to find one of the articles I read, where basically they were saying that the strength and direction (in 3 dimensions, as apparently it can point a bit up or down) of the Earth magnetic field had an impact on the calibration (or compensation, as I believe they call it more appropriately) process. It's not my field by any means, but they made it sound like compensating in an area where the external magnetic field is weaker yields different results than compensating in an area where the field is stronger, and that elevation also could have an impact
Thanks for the threads. Let me just note that even SAR104 (I remember him from my Phantom Pilots days, the other guy I don't), in the first thread you mentioned, doesn't say "it's a fact" or compares that to the Earth being flat, but rather questions the distance-based recalibration and says it "makes no sense to me under any obvious hypothesis".
Those were just some examples I found quickly.
He's said plenty more since, especially that he's checked everything properly and confirms that there is no physical reason.
They have reached their conclusions, but I would be surprised if they would not be open to other interpretations.
Having had plenty of communication with them, I would be more than surprised if they said anything diferent from what I've been trying (and way, way more than I wanted to) to explain.
You keep wanting to talk about this like it's still not certain, but really, it's quite certain and well known.
Speaking of which, I'll try to find one of the articles I read, where basically they were saying that the strength and direction (in 3 dimensions, as apparently it can point a bit up or down) of the Earth magnetic field had an impact on the calibration (or compensation, as I believe they call it more appropriately) process. It's not my field by any means, but they made it sound like compensating in an area where the external magnetic field is weaker yields different results than compensating in an area where the field is stronger, and that elevation also could have an impact
Whoever suggests that doesn't properly understand what compass calibration does and what it can't do.
There's a lot of myth and misunderstanding due to the way DJI has messed up their communications on the topic.
in my opinion - there are valid arguments for location-based recalibration.
For the umpteenth time, it only identifies and measures magnetic fields associated with the drone.
It can't tell anything about location or magnetic fields beyond the drone.
Whatever is out there is what the compass will show as it's reading after the drone's magnetic fields are subtracted.
Until someone understands that, they will come up with all kinds of incorrect ideas.
If you want clarification on that, sar is the guy that can explain in detail why the calibration procedure cannot possibly look into things beyond the drone itself.
And if you don't add/remove stuff from the AC, then location is the only reason why DJI should ask to recalibrate. Well, they seem to do it also after 30 days, but that's yet another story... and yet another set of theories.
And serious thinking, analysing data and testing, not just opinions or theories has proved that there is no real justifiable reason for DJI requiring the additional caliibrating.
As for your test, maybe the P4P has a better (less sensitive) magnetometer than the M2, or the MM.
No ... they are all similar and very sensitive
I've spent way too much time and effort on this which is basic understanding for how these drones work.
I shouldn't have been challenged and abused as much as I have by some people who have only just taken their brand new Mini out the box.
I've worn out my two typing fingers and don't want to go over this even more as I've spelled everything out multiple times.
If you stil doubt what I've said and want more information, go to the guys I pointed to.
If you want to ignore it all, that's your perogative.
As a working scientist, I can't do that and need to find the truth to know what I'm doing.
|
|