Missing rud on X9D plus Input screen 5/14

[Wayne]

This is what I usually do, but if you have an aggressively aerobatic plane you may want that "default" setting to be tamed down some. (This plane can fly on full rates just fine.)

 

[Charley38]

View attachment 304

Thanks; so the FW runs through the menu from the top down. I'll take out one SW entry and see what happens.

CR

 

[Charley38]

This is what I usually do, but if you have an aggressively aerobatic plane you may want that "default" setting to be tamed down some. (This plane can fly on full rates just fine.)

Are you telling me that the FW won't execute the default setting unless something else in the chain goes missing?

CR

 

[Scott Page]

Are you telling me that the FW won't execute the default setting unless something else in the chain goes missing?

CR

The firmware scans top down (In each input or channel) for the first line that has a "true" switch position and executes that line ignoring those below. If no lines have a true switch position then the that channel is inactive. Having no switch value leaves a line true all of the time. So, if the bottom line without a switch position is "true" all of the time - if the lines above don't have true switch values then the bottom line is the first line that's true.

In the example Wayne showed above -- he COULD have actually removed the bottom line with 100% and the switch position from the second to the bottom line to accomplish the same result saving a teeny tiny amount of memory.

 

[Charley38]

The firmware scans top down (In each input or channel) for the first line that has a "true" switch position and executes that line ignoring those below. If no lines have a true switch position then the that channel is inactive. Having no switch value leaves a line true all of the time. So, if the bottom line without a switch position is "true" all of the time - if the lines above don't have true switch values then the bottom line is the first line that's true.

In the example Wayne showed above -- he COULD have actually removed the bottom line with 100% and the switch position from the second to the bottom line to accomplish the same result saving a teeny tiny amount of memory.

But if that's true, the lower 50% switch position would have been eliminated..Not what's wanted.

CR

 

[Scott Page]

But if that's true, the lower 50% switch position would have been eliminated..Not what's wanted.

CR

Let me try again and see if this hits home.

Having NO switch position on the bottom line (50% in this case) would make it always true if considered It would only be considered if the lines above it were false (switch condition not met).

Just considering the AIL input for example. Wipe out the bottom line and eliminate the switch for the 50% line. Now consider what the transmitter does IF the switch is in the SD down position.
1. Line 1 -- where weight is 100%. Transmitter asks "Switch D in up position?" FALSE so go to next line
2. Line 2 where weight is 75%. Transmitter asks "Swiitch D in middle position?" FALSE go to next line
3. Line 3 where weight is 50%. Transmitter asks nothing because with no switch position is defined so it's TRUE - and that line is used.

 

[Charley38]

Still leaves an undefined switch position, not what I want. I'll go with Wayne's example. Still it's a good example of the firmware logic flow.

Thanks,

CR