Closed
Conversation
Merged
Contributor
|
Looks good to me. I'm going to merge this on the master branch: #726 |
Contributor
python bindings are available on the master branch too. However, there we use a recent release of pybind11 (v3.x) instead of the |
Contributor
It's merged into ros2 branch now as well. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Directed to ros2 branch, due to python bindings being available there. I'd be happy to redirect to master, but would appreciate someone pointing to whether I would need to add the python binding.
This adds a cost term that I have found useful, which sums the total change in orientation of a link over a trajectory.
Motivation
For some plans where the robot is grasping an object, I would see that the shortest overall joint motion may induce multiple flips of the object in space - which isn't desired.
In my case, this could not be easily solved by balancing the joint space weightings because joints 4 and 6 could act in opposition to each other to maintain a favourable consistent orientation. Also, the motion did need a 180° rotation of the object, so orientation constraints couldn't be applied.