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

TrajectoryPlanner do not consider obstacles while generating escape velocities. #516

Open
AravindaDP opened this issue Aug 24, 2016 · 6 comments

Comments

@AravindaDP
Copy link

AravindaDP commented Aug 24, 2016

It appears that when TrajectoryPlanner generates escape trajectories, It do not consider the costmap obstacles.

https://github.com/ros-planning/navigation/blob/indigo-devel/base_local_planner/src/trajectory_planner.cpp#L910

Is this by design? I think this behavior need to be at least made configurable so that users could choose to whether or not to consider costmap obstacles when escaping.

@AravindaDP
Copy link
Author

@AravindaDP
Copy link
Author

@DLu , @mikeferguson
Thought you might be able to shed some light on this?

@mikeferguson
Copy link
Contributor

I think the notion was: most robots had a single forward-facing laser and didn't have sensors behind them, and so they probably have an inaccurate understanding of the world back there so checking the costmap was already fairly useless.

That's probably no longer the case in many cases, and so adding (optional) costmap checking sounds like a great enhancement. Pull requests welcomed.

@Cavalletta98
Copy link

Has been solved?

@mikeferguson
Copy link
Contributor

AFAIK, nobody has worked on this (it certainly hasn't been proposed as a PR to this repo even if they have)

@Cavalletta98
Copy link

Can you please provide me an alternative planner that could not suffer of this problem?

Combinacijus pushed a commit to Combinacijus/navigation that referenced this issue Mar 27, 2024
* various improvements across docs website

* build issues fix
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants