New Tool: QGC2ROMFS

[Filipe-Cavalheiro]

New Tool: QGC2ROMFS

• Ensures that parameters set in QGroundControl (QGC) are correctly transferred to Gazebo.
• Can be executed manually or with a single-line command, as described in the README.

Changelog Entry

For release notes:

Feature: QGC2ROMFS->pass parameters from QGC to simulations with ease.

Test coverage

• Tested only for the gazebo (gz) simulator.

Context

• As described this new tool will allow the user to pass the parameters from the QGroundControl into the simulator of choice making the simulation more accurate since the parameters should be the same between reality and simulation. This tool came into existence since there was a discrepancy between simulation and reality that was not accounted for and lead to a crash.
• A previews PR as been done to the gazebo simulator git, but later acknowledge the versatility of the tool for all simulators. Implemented QGC-Gazebo Parameter Sync Tools & Avl_automation Enhancements.
• An example (easly_glider4) shows the input and output of the tool.

[Jaeyoung-Lim]

Sorry for the late response, but I dont undetstand why this tools is needed.

QGC only configures px4 parameters that are stored in ROMFS. Why does this have anything to do with a simulator? And what is the relationship with QGC and the simulator in this case?

[Filipe-Cavalheiro]

Hi, first of all — thank you for reviewing this!

The purpose of this tool was to parse parameters from a Pixhawk to Gazebo by downloading the .params file via QGroundControl and storing those parameters in the ROMFS directory, so they could be read by Gazebo to configure the vehicle in simulation.

However, after implementing this, I realized that a similar feature already exists, the param import function, as described in the PX4 Parameters & Configurations documentation.

The main difference is that param import reads parameters from a referenced file, while my implementation directly writes the parameters into the ROMFS directory for simulation use. Given that the existing functionality covers the intended use case, I believe this pull request can be closed.

Thanks again, happy coding and safe flights!