Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

The checksum does not match when receiving rtcm messages between two ublox ZED-F9P #354

Closed
isrigorev opened this issue Sep 30, 2024 · 1 comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working New This issue is new, and should not be marked as stale

Comments

@isrigorev
Copy link

Describe the bug

I'm using two ublox F9P, one configured as a base and the other as a rover. Ntrip server configured using pygpsclient. Checksum error appears when connecting using ntrip_client

[WARN] [1727698883.841775]: Found packet, but checksums didn't match
[WARN] [1727698883.842424]: Expected Checksum: 0xFF00
[WARN] [1727698883.843070]: Actual Checksum: 0x81688F
[WARN] [1727698883.843736]: Found packet, but checksums didn't match
[WARN] [1727698883.844369]: Expected Checksum: 0x1
[WARN] [1727698883.845008]: Actual Checksum: 0x91185E
[WARN] [1727698883.845643]: Found packet, but checksums didn't match
[WARN] [1727698883.846262]: Expected Checksum: 0x0
[WARN] [1727698883.846871]: Actual Checksum: 0xF1A64F

At the same time, when using a client connection via pygpsclient, there are no errors, packets arrive. Everything works similarly when connected via u-center

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

  1. Launch Node with command roslaunch ntrip_client ntrip_client.lauch
  2. Successfull connection to server
  3. See Error

Expected behavior
checksums must match

Environment (please complete the following information):

  • OS: Ubuntu 18.04
  • Architecture: x86_64
  • ROS Version: noetic
  • Version: 1.0.0
  • Sensor(s): ublox ZED-F9P

Modifications
No modifications

@isrigorev isrigorev added the bug Something isn't working label Sep 30, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added the New This issue is new, and should not be marked as stale label Sep 30, 2024
@isrigorev
Copy link
Author

it seems that packets that pass the sum check are also present, they just alternate with those that fail

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working New This issue is new, and should not be marked as stale
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant