-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14
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
CartesianControlServer should handle streaming commands #105
Comments
Started with some refactoring at the |
Great to see improvements in |
@jgvictores the current WIP list for old xCallbackPort commands is: |
I think the current WIP is great! |
The current WIP list is: // move forward (relative to end-effector)
void fwd(const std::vector<double> &rot, double step);
// move backwards (relative to end-effector)
void bkwd(const std::vector<double> &rot, double step);
// rotate in end-effector frame
void rot(const std::vector<double> &rot);
// pan in end-effector frame
void pan(const std::vector<double> &transl);
// instantaneous velocity steps (inertial frame)
void vmos(const std::vector<double> &xdot);
// instantaneous velocity steps (end-effector frame)
void eff(const std::vector<double> &xdotee);
// achieve pose in inertial frame
void pose(const std::vector<double> &x, double interval); See also full documentation here: kinematics-dynamics/libraries/TeoYarp/ICartesianControl.h Lines 239 to 339 in 2fd0b37
As you can see, I added Additionally, I've introduced the The unnamed command has been set aside by now - I'd like to improve control with the For completeness, note that end-effector frame commands require a new solver method, kinematics-dynamics/libraries/TeoYarp/ICartesianSolver.h Lines 130 to 144 in 2fd0b37
|
@jgvictores I'm a bit worried about the amount of commands resulting from this, some of them apparently redundant. There are three main variants: RPC vs streaming commands, position vs velocity control (vs torque), and inertial vs end-effector frame. And there is more to come: I'd find quite useful a Are you OK with adding new commands as they render convenient for our applications, or is it preferable to keep the lowest number of them and parameterize if possible? I was thinking about a new interface (inheritable by |
Resolved at #117, improvements will be tracked in several follow-up issues:
|
This was implemented on
CartesianServerLib
at asibot-main (see xCallbackPort.cpp), but never made its way to CCS. Thevmos
command - velocity control in cartesian space - seems the most interesting option to start working at.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: