Skip to content

[WIP] Improved the test_move script in ur_driver - #366

Open
hsd-dev wants to merge 4 commits into
ros-industrial:kinetic-develfrom
hsd-dev:feat_test_move
Open

[WIP] Improved the test_move script in ur_driver#366
hsd-dev wants to merge 4 commits into
ros-industrial:kinetic-develfrom
hsd-dev:feat_test_move

Conversation

@hsd-dev

@hsd-dev hsd-dev commented Jul 11, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Related to #158

@hsd-dev hsd-dev changed the title Improved the test_move script in ur_driver [WIP] Improved the test_move script in ur_driver Jul 12, 2018
@hsd-dev

hsd-dev commented Jul 12, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Some changes I would like to make:

  • Script assumes 6 DOF (#L43 and #L83). Generalize that to N DOF
  • Add velocity checks if possible

This script would not be specific to UR. Would there be a better place for it?

@NadiaHG NadiaHG left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With this minor changes.

Working on simulation 👍

Comment thread ur_driver/test_move.py
import time
import roslib; roslib.load_manifest('ur_driver')
import rospy
import actionlib

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

missed:
import sys

Comment thread ur_driver/test_move.py Outdated
except KeyboardInterrupt:
rospy.signal_shutdown("KeyboardInterrupt")
raise
_use_ros_control = False

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@ipa-hsd _use_ros_control?? what does it mean?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wanted to read the controller's namespace in case of ros_control. Else the user passes the namespace as an arugument.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

removed this to avoid confusion

Comment thread ur_driver/test_move.py Outdated

if _use_ros_control == True:
controller_ns = get_controller().name
elif(len(sys.argv) > 0):

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it should be:

elif(len(sys.argv) > 1):

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yes you are right.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

fixed

NadiaHG
NadiaHG previously approved these changes Aug 23, 2018

@NadiaHG NadiaHG left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tested on simulation and working

@NadiaHG

NadiaHG commented Aug 23, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@gavanderhoorn please merge if its ok for you

@gavanderhoorn

gavanderhoorn commented Aug 23, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@ipa-hsd @ipa-nhg: this is definitely an upgrade, but at a first glance it also looks somewhat complex.

The goal of this script is two-fold:

  1. provide an easy way to test the driver
  2. provide an example of how action clients can be used to communicate with the driver

Goal 1 is covered by this, no doubt.

I'm wondering if we're not making things too complex for goal 2 however. The script has a lot of things I would not expect in a (simple) example, such as listening for JointState msgs, dealing with keyboard input and it hides the typical "wait-for-server;create-goal;send-to-server;wait-for-completion" control flow somewhat.

If you agree, we could perhaps keep this file as it is now proposed and add a much simpler version that covers the second goal.

@gavanderhoorn

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Independent of this: I believe it would be prudent to print a very visible warning drawing attention to the fact that the robot is going to move, and that it is going to move in a certain way. Perhaps the script should also clarify how it is going to move, and that users should make sure the robot has X and Y free space around it?

@hsd-dev

hsd-dev commented Sep 6, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@gavanderhoorn : I have added the warning messages.

If you agree, we could perhaps keep this file as it is now proposed and add a much simpler version that covers the second goal.

I am not sure of the future of this repo, but maybe the new file can be added to a more generic repository where other arms can be tested as well.

@NadiaHG

NadiaHG commented Jul 8, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I would like merge this to the kinetic-devel branch (first the merge conflict has to be solved). The full package "ur_driver" is deprecated (even removed for new distros), then makes not sense to put here more effort, and the changes of the PR improve the current version.

@gavanderhoorn if you don't want to merge it, I suggest to close the PR, if @ipa-hsd agrees.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants