-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
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
UR_Gazebo fidelity vs real hardware #566
Comments
Not very.
I would not depend on it -- but afaik, there have been no comparisons (as in: papers published). (edit: note also: last time I checked, using
no, I don't believe so.
No. MoveIt "controllers" are not the same as Additionally: MoveIt cannot "control" any robots with pure efforts. It will always only output joint space The real hw doesn't support joint torque control, so you cannot use those.
No. Gazebo doesn't use anything from "the real arm", nor does "the real arm" use anything from Gazebo. If you're asking about tuned PIDs for velocity interfaces, then I would not assume PIDs working with Gazebo will work with real hw or vice-versa.
I can't really say, as there are too many variables. One of those variables would be the version of Gazebo: behaviour of simulations changes between major versions of Gazebo, so something which works well enough in Gazebo on Kinetic, might not work with Melodic, but could suddenly start working again in Noetic. |
I would be interested in a comparison of the dynamics of the arm in Gazebo versus real hw. It's well possible someone or a group has performed a system identification of the different variants. That would get us one half of such a comparison. What remains would be to tune the Gazebo models such that the dynamics start to approach the ones identified. |
Finally: as this is -- right now -- not an actual issue with the packages in this repository (it's more of a question/discussion), I'm going to close it. If it turns out there is something to fix, we can re-open -- or track those problems in new issues. In the meantime: feel free to keep commenting on it. |
thanks for the quick and thorough response. |
Not really. The main reason to change to Dynamic behaviour of robots in Gazebo depends on much more than a simple change in the
etc etc I'm by no means an expert on Gazebo, nor dynamics simulation, so this is just my experience. And as I wrote: I -- and the rest of the If you'd be interested, I would be willing to support it. |
Is this you: accuracy of gazebo simulation of arm vs real hardware ? |
yea, I wanted to pose the question to the gazebo experts for their perspective. Mainly wanted to see if anyone has done something like this in general and if they had any data and learn from their methodology. While it would be amazing to spend the time to investigate the UR arm I have. I unfortunately have to focus on a different arm for this investigation. I was hoping actually that someone else had done this on the UR since it's such a popular platform. again thank you for your responses. It has been very educational. |
well, have you searched for this? I doubt everyone using URs watches this issue tracker. So it may well be that someone has already done the work, published about it (fi) but hasn't reported back. Unfortunately that does happen often. |
I saw the discussion in #521 and have some questions.
How accurate is the current UR_Gazebo simulation using hardware_interface/PositionJointInterface? Is it a good enough approximation of the dynamics of the arm if not interacting with other objects? Can I have any sense of confidence that I can get analogous behavior between the sim and real arm?
If we are switching to hardware_interface/EffortJointInterface for the gazebo controller, then would the moveit controller also need to use effort_controllers/JointTrajectoryController(otherwise how do we even compare the gazebo arm with the real)? If I tune the controller PID's in gazebo, are those values likely to have any bearings on the tuning for the real arm?
I want a gazebo sim that can approximate my real arm performance/behavior loaded/unloaded. Since I'm using a position_controllers/JointTrajectoryController for the arm, the current ur_gazebo config matches it better. For my purposes, is the current config good enough?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: