-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 55
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
[irteus/irtmodel.l] support :fat option in self-collision-check (#147) #234
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Do we need to re-create |
This method evaluate (original 'fat' to create pqpmodel + distance returned So if you create pqpmodel with fat=0, it works correctly Fat in pqp model means the mergen to create collision model so this can be Fat in this method is threshold distance to consider self collision, so it Maybe we should change key name from fat to min-distance or something 2015年7月20日月曜日、Shunichi [email protected]さんは書きました:
◉ Kei Okada |
(let ((cpairs) (col-count 0)) | ||
(dolist (p pairs) | ||
(let ((colp (/= (funcall collision-func (car p) (cdr p)) 0))) | ||
(let ((colp |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, I understand the motivation of this PR.
For this purpose, it would be better to another name for fat as you said.,
e.g., fat
=> min-distance
, because fatting collision shape is not theoretically same as changing distance.
How about adding
In this way, we can check |
having fat to plist may good (pqpmodel-fat ?) but if someone is using fat for calculating distance between two links, that's mistake. Main advantage of using PQP over RAPID is that it is able to calculate distance between two objects. I interpret the motivation of #147 to specify minimum distance when calculating self collision , but if #147 is "really" want to change fat, I'd like to know the detail. |
add fat to pslot -> #234 (comment) |
However, if checking collision or not is much faster than computing distance, :fat parameter would be important. |
And also, I'd like to manage several pqp models with different :fat parameters. |
why? ◉ Kei Okada On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Ryohei Ueda [email protected]
|
for example, in IK just use :fat 0 and use larger value in order to check 2015年7月20日月曜日、Kei [email protected]さんは書きました:
✉︎ from iPhone |
In that case we should check 'distance' between a robot and environment. ◉ Kei Okada 2015/07/20 20:52、Ryohei Ueda [email protected] のメッセージ:
|
Yes but Collision check might be easier than distance calculation. But I 2015年7月20日月曜日、Kei [email protected]さんは書きました:
✉︎ from iPhone |
Ok, I created test code to compare collision detection vs collision distance at 95454fd the results shows there are no difference between collision detection / distance calculation
|
I see, it means that... we do not need :fat option? |
oh, you mean add :fat option besides :min-distance at :self-collision-check ◉ Kei Okada On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Ryohei Ueda [email protected]
|
Yes, However if we want to use different :fat parameters for the objects, :fat parameter makes sense. |
@snozawa , please check k-okada@a762650, which i changed from #234 (comment) @garaemon, hum if you want to do that we can not supply :fat keyward to :self-collision-check as k-okada@4a6c4ee, may be we can use |
see #147