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

Servo as local planner demonstration #28

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Aug 18, 2021
Merged

Servo as local planner demonstration #28

merged 14 commits into from
Aug 18, 2021

Conversation

AdamPettinger
Copy link
Contributor

Description

  • Adds Servo as a local planner (following @sjahr's PR for that over in moveit2)
  • Hardcodes the MTC global planner to do a relative Cartesian plan
  • Adds a joint configuration for the start of the Cartesian path
  • Allows Servo local planner to execute the trajectory at constant velocity, with user input to allow rotation of the last joint on-line

How to test

Follow the updated README section Hybrid Planning Demonstration

Note this PR includes a dependency change in moveit2, so you should pull the correct version and build in order to test properly

Next Steps

This is mostly a demonstration of the hybrid planning capabilities. I am not too sure we actually want to merge this in (or at least as is now with hardcoded stuff for the demo). @henningkayser do you have any next steps for this effort?

Copy link
Member

@henningkayser henningkayser left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this is a really useful step and we should merge this so that @christianlandgraf can reproduce this with hardware. I'd be interested to see if we see any performance differences. @AdamPettinger how about adding your temporary local solver to the demo package next to the global MTC solver? That way we can continue experimenting with it, possibly adding IK-based jogging as a next step?

@AdamPettinger
Copy link
Contributor Author

I am working on adding it, don't quite have the pluginlib configurations correct yet so the local planner does not find the new ServoSolver plugin

@christianlandgraf
Copy link
Contributor

Looks great!! Unfortunately, the hybrid_planning_container fails on my setup although the global and local goals seem to be succesfully accepted... Somehow it worked yesterday with commit 0fa9dbe but I didn't manage to get it working again and therefore I didn't tested it on real hardware.

Besides that, I had to do some minor fixes to succesfully compile everything:

@AdamPettinger
Copy link
Contributor Author

The latest commit I just added is following the ROS 2 Pluginlib tutorial with the local solver in our (hybrid_planning_demo) package. However, this still isn't loading the plugins correctly, see error below. If I could ask maybe @sjahr to take a look and see if there are any glaring problems, that would be great

[ERROR - local_planner_component]: Exception while loading trajectory operator 'hybrid_planning_demo::SimpleServoSampler': 'Could not find library corresponding to plugin hybrid_planning_demo::SimpleServoSampler. Make sure the plugin description XML file has the correct name of the library and that the library actually exists.'
[ERROR - local_planner_component]: Exception while loading constraint solver 'hybrid_planning_demo::ServoSolver': 'Could not find library corresponding to plugin hybrid_planning_demo::ServoSolver. Make sure the plugin description XML file has the correct name of the library and that the library actually exists.'

@christianlandgraf
Copy link
Contributor

It works on the UR10e now! I would suggest to revert the changes in ipa_demo_cell_description and I think it's ready to merge aftewards.

@AdamPettinger AdamPettinger changed the title WIP: Servo as local planner demonstration Servo as local planner demonstration Aug 17, 2021
@AdamPettinger
Copy link
Contributor Author

It works on the UR10e now! I would suggest to revert the changes in ipa_demo_cell_description and I think it's ready to merge aftewards.

@christianlandgraf Done! Will you verify it looks ok? Note the launch now has to be with the UR10e, or the pre-welding configuration is in collision with the table

@henningkayser I didn't want to update the moveit branch to my fork again since I am leaving soon, but we might want to use your fork rebased on the foxy branch now, and include this change in hybrid planning. I hope this will make CI pass

@christianlandgraf
Copy link
Contributor

@AdamPettinger It looks good to me. I think that's a minor issue since I hope we can mainly continue work with the UR10e from now on...

@AdamPettinger AdamPettinger merged commit 34af9f4 into master Aug 18, 2021
@delete-merged-branch delete-merged-branch bot deleted the hackathon branch August 18, 2021 15:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
5 participants