-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 39
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
[WIP] Enable impedance control on hrpsys-simulator (Address #302). #305
Conversation
5fb1647
to
82d1415
Compare
8a77ab3
to
f942a0b
Compare
@@ -20,6 +25,7 @@ | |||
<arg name="MODEL_FILE" value="$(arg MODEL_FILE)" /> | |||
<arg name="SIMULATOR_NAME" value="HiroNX(Robot)0" /> | |||
<arg name="CONF_FILE_COLLISIONDETECT" value="$(arg CONF_FILE_COLLISIONDETECT)" /> | |||
<arg name="USE_IMPEDANCECONTROLLER" value="$(arg USE_IMPEDANCE)" /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I found in hironx_ros_bridge_simulation.launch
, this isn't even turned to true
and still Impedance Controller works. So I ran ran sim on NEXTAGE with this set as false
, I stopped seeing "wait for HrpsysSeqStateROSBridge0 : None"
error (discussed in #333) on the simulator.
rtmlaunch nextage_ros_bridge nextage_ros_bridge_simulation.launch USE_IMPEDANCE:=false
However, the following still occurs when I ran robot.startImpedance
and I don't see the impedance behavior.
[ic] Could not found impedance controller param [rarm]
f942a0b
to
ad435c6
Compare
@@ -1,16 +1,21 @@ | |||
<launch> | |||
<arg name="USE_IMPEDANCE" default="false" doc="true to enable Impedance Controller." /> <!-- Need to defined early to be used by another ags. --> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
#305 (comment) is not entirely correct.
When I set this USE_IMPEDANCE
to true
in order to apply the .wrl
file that has f/t sensors, "wait for HrpsysSeqStateROSBridge0 : None" error still occurs.
That said, what's causing the error above is the main_ftsensor.wrl
file that I'm adding in this PR.
[ros_bridge] .wrl with f/t sensors.
74e12f1
to
4d1e904
Compare
…_bridge to enable impedance control.
…or HrpsysSeqStateROSBridge0 : None' error. Still tork-a#302 needs fixed.
…ew .dae file. .dae is hardcoded in nextage_ros_bridge/conf upon building so having multiple versions of .dae to select upon runtime may not be easy to implement.
With 98034a7, Without 98034a7, the same error keeps occuring. Thing I particularly noticed:
Normally, Full log
|
I think that's not an issue -- Running |
I switched back to the |
,ありとあらゆる変更を sim 上で試したつもりなので,正直お手上げなのです...
僕の方で引き取ります.メモ:
#305 (comment)
は
[hrpsys.py] wait for HiroNX(Robot)0 : <hrpsys.rtm.RTcomponent instance at
0x7fa9fd4068c0> ( timeout 0 < 10)
[hrpsys.py] findComps -> RobotHardware : <hrpsys.rtm.RTcomponent instance
at 0x7fa9fd4068c0> isActive? = False
と出ていますが、シミュレーションだとrtls して、HiroNX(Robot) があるべき.
…--
◉ Kei Okada
2017年6月7日 11:31 Isaac I.Y. Saito <[email protected]>:
tork-a/delivery#436 (comment)
<tork-a/delivery#436 (comment)> の
roslaunch の問題ですが,ROS bridge 側の問題で,シミュレータで起きている #305 (comment)
<#305 (comment)>
と同じではないかと思っています.なので現地作業で解決する必要は必ずしも無いかなと.先ほど口頭でお伝えしたとおり,
布施さんと相談して現地作業をどこまでやるか決めて頂いて良いと思います.
私は同 PR に #305 (comment)
<#305 (comment)>
のように書いた通り,ありとあらゆる変更を sim 上で試したつもりなので,正直お手上げなのです...
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#305 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAeG3FpIFEiA8rBY4AYmHqffL1gwC_Ywks5sBguDgaJpZM4MsbKi>
.
|
これで、
で動くはずです. |
メモ:
ちなみにプロジェクトファイルはnextage_nosim.xml と nextage.xml があるが、前者は力学シミュレーションなしなので、力センサに情報は入らない.
とする ちなみに、confファイルはhironx_ros_bridgeパッケージからconfigure_inする(
|
Superseded by #336 |
UPDATE 20170531 I've already spent tremendous amount on this PR and still ashamedly can't get it running. I'll stop working on this. If anyone is willing to take this over please feel free to open a new pull request (it's your choice to fork this branch or start over your own).
DO NOT MERGE YET. #302 is not yet solved by this.
Besides, adding an entire
.dae
file only for optional feature (ie. impedance) is way too much too.