-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 237
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
ScaledJTC - Added support for setting speedscaling factor via topic #871
Conversation
@fmauch I might have also encountered a bug with the ScaledJTC but I am not sure if it comes from my adaptions. Therefore I add it here. While testing we quite often ran into the The corresponding part of the
I can also reproduce this issue when using the mocked interface. |
Okey I managed to fix the issue. It is unrelated to the actual change introduced in this PR. (I can separate if necessary into an extra PR). The Goal Time Tolerance Violation check if only executed if the arm is not within the position tolerances after the trajectory was finished sampling. So this issue will only occur if one runs fast movements with load (I dont know why I had it also in sim...). During such movements we won't be within the goal position tolerances and therefore we start checking the goal time tolerance. But the goal time tolerance did not compensate for the fact that if we scale down the trajectory execution that...well execution takes longer than expected. I hopefully fixed this EDIT: My fix didn't work unfortunately. I therefore reverted it. I create a new PR for it where we can also discuss how to fix it |
Hi,
this PR adds support for setting the speed scaling factor via
~/speed_scaling_factor
.The behavior can be activated by specifying
use_speed_scaling_topic_instead
in the controller configuration. Not specifying or setting the variable to false will keep the default behavior.This feature allows using the controller in multi arm setups or for usage with different hardware which doesn't have any
speed_scaling state
.EDIT: Just saw that I based the PR on the iron branch. If I should rebase it on the main branch let me know
EDIT2: As an alternative we could expose it as a parameter which would make a bit more similar to the
cartesian controllers
EDIT3: The topic can now be changed via the config file. This allows to have one speed_scaling_factor topic for multiple controllers. Default is still
~/speed_scaling_factor
.The topic is now transient_local.