Dear All, I'm an enthusiastic amateur implementing a robotic project which will collect a relatively fast asynchronous stream of sensor data (gps, imagery, gyroscopic etc). I would like to capture this data for post processing in an hdf5 file (which I'm totally new to). I understand that variable length packet tables aren't there to help. While, as a newbie, the documentation gives me the nuts and bolts about how to use the APIs, I've got no feel for how people are actually using them in practice. There's some Boeing information which seems to assume that variable length packet tables were going to be implemented. My first thought would be to open a series of fixed length packet tables; one for each of my sensors - applying a common timestamp to each one. I'd appreciate your thoughts on whether this is reasonable* / ludicrous* / laughable* / answer depends on a huge number of factors I've probably never heard of* (*delete as applicable)?
Many thanks - Stu Reeks
Stu,
Packet tables will work just fine for you in this way. It is very similar to what I'm doing capturing a heterogeneous mix of sensors in real time.
Depending on the complexity of your sensors, you may need to use multiple packet tables. Or, say for convienience, you might put the imagery data in one dataset and include the sensor H&S info in a separate one.
S
ยทยทยท
-----Original Message-----
From: Hdf-forum [mailto:hdf-forum-bounces@lists.hdfgroup.org] On Behalf Of Stuart Reeks
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 7:05 PM
To: hdf-forum@lists.hdfgroup.org
Subject: [Hdf-forum] Noob request for Packet Table guidance
Dear All, I'm an enthusiastic amateur implementing a robotic project which will collect a relatively fast asynchronous stream of sensor data (gps, imagery, gyroscopic etc). I would like to capture this data for post processing in an hdf5 file (which I'm totally new to). I understand that variable length packet tables aren't there to help. While, as a newbie, the documentation gives me the nuts and bolts about how to use the APIs, I've got no feel for how people are actually using them in practice. There's some Boeing information which seems to assume that variable length packet tables were going to be implemented. My first thought would be to open a series of fixed length packet tables; one for each of my sensors - applying a common timestamp to each one. I'd appreciate your thoughts on whether this is reasonable* / ludicrous* /
laughable* / answer depends on a huge number of factors I've probably never heard of* (*delete as applicable)?
Many thanks - Stu Reeks
_______________________________________________
Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion.
Hdf-forum@lists.hdfgroup.org
http://mail.lists.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_lists.hdfgroup.org
________________________________
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may be proprietary and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Exelis Inc. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. Exelis Inc. accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail.
