Skip to content
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

compatibility with ros_control (ROS1) #292

Open
hamyyy opened this issue Jan 24, 2023 · 1 comment
Open

compatibility with ros_control (ROS1) #292

hamyyy opened this issue Jan 24, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@hamyyy
Copy link

hamyyy commented Jan 24, 2023

How difficult would it be to change the pr2_description package to use standard ros_control joints, transmissions etc. Most of the current ros packages were developed after testing on the pr2. so it would seem like bringing the pr2 up to the current ROS1 control standard should be rather straightforward. might only need to mess around with urdf/xacro files. This may open the possibility of using the PR2 with ROS2 also.

@v4hn
Copy link
Member

v4hn commented Jan 24, 2023

It's clearly possible with some effort. I started looking into it some years ago, but I never finished anything worth saving.
The urdf only needs tiny changes for the transmissions (and you don't even need them if you patch one parser code somewhere, but the hardware interface and device drivers need to be ported as well.
Eventually that would let us use the standard ros_control (e.g. JointTrajectoryController) interfaces which improved many use-cases slightly.
If you have access to a robot and do the work to port it I'm happy to test on our PR2 as well. :)

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants