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

Control Board wrong joint limits for fingers #348

Closed
xEnVrE opened this issue Feb 28, 2018 · 8 comments
Closed

Control Board wrong joint limits for fingers #348

xEnVrE opened this issue Feb 28, 2018 · 8 comments
Assignees

Comments

@xEnVrE
Copy link
Contributor

xEnVrE commented Feb 28, 2018

The .ini configuration files for fingers, e.g. gazebo_icub_left_hand_index.ini contain a group [LIMITS] that specifies limits for each physical joint. These limits are loaded within the control board plugin and used to, e.g., specify constraints on the generation of trajectories (see here).

Since trajectories are generated for each controlled DoF of the finger and not for each physical DoF, e.g. for the index {l,r}_index_proximal and {l,r}_index_distal, but the variable m_jointPosLimits is not updated to take into account coupling then joint limits used by the trajectory generator are wrong.

Could it be an option to add a method like

decouplePosLimits(std::vector<Range> &posLimits)

to the decoupling handlers ThumbCouplingHandler, IndexCouplingHandler, MiddleCouplingHandler, PinkyCouplingHandler

and call it in the method GazeboYarpControlBoardDriver::setMinMaxPos?

Or is it better to change the meaning of the section [LIMITS] so that it contains the limits of the controlled DoFs instead that of all the physical DoFs?

@traversaro
Copy link
Member

cc @randaz81 @triccyx

@randaz81
Copy link
Member

decouplePosLimits(std::vector &posLimits)
to the decoupling handlers ThumbCouplingHandler, IndexCouplingHandler, MiddleCouplingHandler, PinkyCouplingHandler

seems the right solution to me.
But please allow me some time to check the current status of the code

@traversaro
Copy link
Member

Any updated on this @randaz81 ? Do you think we can proceed with the solution proposed by @xEnVrE ?

@traversaro
Copy link
Member

@xEnVrE I think you can go forward and open a PR for this on icub-gazebo, @randaz81 can comment on the PR before if he has any additional comment.

@xEnVrE
Copy link
Contributor Author

xEnVrE commented Jan 21, 2019

@traversaro I'm planning to do this very soon.

@traversaro
Copy link
Member

cc @ale-git given your recent work on Mk3 hand you may be interested in this issue.

@xEnVrE
Copy link
Contributor Author

xEnVrE commented Sep 8, 2023

Can we close this given that the above PR was merged?

cc @traversaro

@traversaro
Copy link
Member

Ok, thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants