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

Added LuGre friction model parameters to protocol #989

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: devel
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ale-git
Copy link
Contributor

@ale-git ale-git commented Oct 22, 2024

The yarprobotinterface parser is now able to read LuGre friction model parameters from robot configuration files.

@ale-git ale-git self-assigned this Oct 22, 2024
Copy link
Member

@pattacini pattacini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @ale-git

We need to handle the icub-firmware-shared version as per robotology/icub-firmware-shared#99 (review).

@pattacini
Copy link
Member

Originated from robotology/icub-firmware-models#97.

@pattacini
Copy link
Member

pattacini commented Oct 24, 2024

Reposting here this comment as it pertains more to this PR:

Hi @ale-git

What's the strategy behind parsing the LuGre params?
Ideally, to provide back-compatibility (quite important here), if the section is not found then the SW should NOT make use of the LuGre.

Copy link
Member

@valegagge valegagge left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @ale-git, I wrote down some small changes. The most important one is related to making the new parameter group mandatory. This means that all robots' configurations need to be updated accordingly.

@valegagge
Copy link
Member

Hi @ale-git ,

in addition, I suggest updating the template of the robot configuration files in order to maintain updated the documentation. If the new group is not mandatory you can add the info to the version 6.

Thanks

@ale-git
Copy link
Contributor Author

ale-git commented Nov 7, 2024

Hi @pattacini and @valegagge I've made the requested changes (LuGre section is not mandatory and the other issues).

@pattacini
Copy link
Member

Thanks @ale-git

We still need to address #989 (review).

For what concerns #989 (comment), I believe a subsequent PR will follow on robots-configuration, so that we can keep Templates up-to-date as well.

cc @valegagge

@valegagge
Copy link
Member

Hi @pattacini and @valegagge I've made the requested changes (LuGre section is not mandatory and the other issues).

I'll do the review in the next few days (asap)

Copy link
Member

@valegagge valegagge left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @ale-git !

@pattacini
Copy link
Member

Well done.
We have to first merge robotology/icub-firmware-shared#99 (review) and then put this in ready for review.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copilot wasn't able to review any files in this pull request.

Files not reviewed (5)
  • conf/iCubFindDependencies.cmake: Language not supported
  • src/libraries/icubmod/embObjMotionControl/embObjMotionControl.cpp: Language not supported
  • src/libraries/icubmod/embObjMotionControl/embObjMotionControl.h: Language not supported
  • src/libraries/icubmod/embObjMotionControl/eomcParser.cpp: Language not supported
  • src/libraries/icubmod/embObjMotionControl/eomcParser.h: Language not supported
pattacini

This comment was marked as outdated.

conf/iCubFindDependencies.cmake Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@pattacini pattacini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@ale-git ale-git marked this pull request as ready for review November 20, 2024 09:58
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 this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants