Publish correct joint velocities in r6bot example 7 #430
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
github-actions
bot
requested review from
bmagyar,
christophfroehlich,
DasRoteSkelett,
destogl,
erickisos,
fmauch,
peterdavidfagan and
saikishor
|
@ecmjohnson The changes explain themself, however, out of curiosity, did you get this message when the robot is moving? or when it is steady?. I'm asking because the velocities are non-zero |
@saikishor These are the commanded velocities published in the |
|
@ecmjohnson I'm just asking if the copy of message you have in the description after the fix is during the execution of the trajectory or not?. Because of course it doesn't make sense that your initial or final state of the trajectory is with non-zero velocities. If this is the case, the resulting velocities could be due to the planner we are using. Thank you |
|
@saikishor Sorry, I must be misunderstanding something. The The single point I included from the trajectory may be confusing. I included a single point (the last from before Full joint trajectory message after change |
|
@ecmjohnson thanks for the information. Fine then the issue is coming from the solver itself. |
|
I had a quick look. The IK solver is called with a twist in tool frame and generates a velocity vector in joint space, which is then integrated to positions. That's why the velocity is not zero in the end: one should probably add another field to the message with the last position (is discarded now) and zero velocity. |
mergify bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 16, 2024
Co-authored-by: Erik Johnson <erikjohnson@blackberry.com> (cherry picked from commit 7ddc8d3)
mergify bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 16, 2024
Co-authored-by: Erik Johnson <erikjohnson@blackberry.com> (cherry picked from commit 7ddc8d3)
This was referenced Jan 16, 2024
|
Thank you @christophfroehlich |
christophfroehlich
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 16, 2024
christophfroehlich
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 16, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Resolves #427 by copying joint velocities into the trajectory point's velocity field. This makes no functional difference for the r6bot controller when both position and velocity are provided as shown by @christophfroehlich here.
Tested by echoing the
/r6bot_controller/joint_trajectorytopic. Prior to the change, bothvelocitiesandpositionswere always the same:After the change, the
velocitiesandpositionsdiffer:No difference in the example is observed.