-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
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
Integrate Bullet #44
Comments
@Lobotuerk and I moved and tested part of this implementation to
At the moment, we will open move away from |
That's too bad about the memory issues. I haven't had much experience with |
Addressed in #208 |
Current statusPR #208 : The following elements are available:
Known issuesIssue with inertia diagonal values: When inertial matrix values that represent objects with a center of mass different than its geometrical one are used with bullet objects, they cause erratic behaviors with the simulation. This issue was found when testing models with a gimbal assembly, an inertia matrix with low inertia values is present in a cylinder inside the assembly. A cylinder equivalent to the one found, with the same inertia matrix was tested using gazebo11, ign-gazebo4 and the bullet libraries standalone, and it fails. However, this works fine with pyBullet by loading the world from the sdf file. Torque limitation: * The angle getter from bullet resets its initial count if the angle difference between two consecutive readings is higher than a hardcoded threshold. To address this issue, a threshold in the max torque was added in the joint controllers. (An extra eyes into the best approach to address this would be appreciated). This is the code we implemented <https://github.com/ignitionrobotics/ign-physics/blob/af978795a077165d91067d11c10912b011b50d4b/bullet/src/JointFeatures.cc#L291> and this is the limitation addressed <https://pybullet.org/Bullet/BulletFull/btHingeConstraint_8cpp_source.html#l00318>. As this issue does not affect ground vehicles as it would aerial ones (higher speeds), the code addressing this was removed from the current PR. Features available:
|
Remember to utilize a custom motion state along with Here is the PR related to |
Another known issue is related to the diff_drive_skid example in ign-gazebo. More information here: #208 (review) |
Another missing feature from Edifice: capsules and ellipsoids. 💊 |
Hi there, I know Bullet supports soft bodies / deformables, but I haven't been able to figure out through your documentation if this is supported within Gazebo. I also noticed this thread here (#222), not necessarily for Bullet, but still soft-body related. Has there been any progress here? If not, what would be needed for this to happen? -- Thanks |
Hi @danielpmorton, Right now there is no support for The Bullet supports is pretty decent right now check these two PRs: #373 and gazebosim/gz-sim#1560. Let us know if you want to put some time in to add this feature to Gazebo and we can start a discussion about the details. |
Hi @ahcorde, thanks for the response! Yes, I'd be interested in putting in some time and adding this feature. Send me an email (danielpmorton@gmail.com) and I'd be happy to chat some more about this! |
@ahcorde Just wanted to check in again after the holidays, are you free for a quick call sometime? It would be super helpful to get a better feel for what would need to get done |
Thanks Alejandro. I sent Steve an email yesterday, I figured that would be a better way to keep in touch than over Github. Will keep you posted depending if I hear / don't hear anything |
hi @danielpmorton, I'll reply here so everyone has the benefit of the information
I think the way we'd want to expose the Bullet soft-body support is to add parameters to SDFormat so that gz-physics can pass those parameters into the The first steps that I would take:
|
Hey Steve, great to hear from you! Thanks for the response – I have a couple more questions if you don’t mind. I can give an overview of the goal of the project as well, just for some context and to see if you have any suggestions on anything else. So very broadly, the goal of what we’re trying to do is that we have an existing repository which was built in ROS Kinetic and Gazebo Classic, and we’d like to include deformable objects for the robot to interact with. These deformables will be 3D meshes rather than a rope or a cloth – basically a duffel bag. Ideally, we’d be able to interface directly with the old ROS version and Gazebo Classic, but I know some of these aren’t really supported anymore. There might be some workarounds here though – the repo has some support for Ubuntu 20 / Ros Noetic through Docker, and as a last resort, we can always import the URDFs/SDFs into Bullet and work exclusively there. We’ve also considered modeling the physics of this object in Bullet and sending it to the older ROS version through a ROS node, but I’m unsure if this is adding another layer of complexity that isn’t necessary if we can get this working in Gazebo. With Bullet so far, I’ve been able to mess around with both the Python and C++ interfaces, having successfully built their demos and created my own demo within their “ExampleBrowser”. I got this to build and run, but when working outside of the Bullet directory, I had some difficulty with Cmake – though, I’m sure Gazebo has the Cmake configured well for the Bullet integration, so maybe this is a non-issue. So for the main Gazebo questions:
Thanks! |
Add support for the Bullet physics engine as an alternative to DART.
Past pull requests have started on this:
The latest code can be found on branches
bullet
andbullet_chapulina
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: