Quantcast
Channel: ROS Answers: Open Source Q&A Forum - RSS feed
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 1441

Issue using moveit::planning_interface::MoveGroup::setPoseTarget with non-empty end_effector_link

$
0
0
I am having a confusing issue when trying to set pose targets wrt a frame other than the chain's end effector link. I can set and get the poses specifying the end_effector_link argument successfully but when I call move(), I get errors to the effect of: [ INFO] [1467279632.377325997]: Position constraint violated on link 'my_frame'. Desired: -0.868717, -0.024240, 0.347688, current: -0.897177, -0.027324, 0.220500 [ INFO] [1467279632.377386843]: Differences 0.0284601 0.00308382 0.127189 [ INFO] [1467279632.377426372]: Orientation constraint satisfied for link 'my_frame'. Quaternion desired: -0.001033 -0.015521 -0.704873 0.709163, quaternion actual: -0.000985 -0.015375 -0.705119 0.708921, error: x=0.000146, y=0.000269, z=0.000691, tolerance: x=0.001000, y=0.001000, z=0.001000 The confusing issue is that "current: -0.897177, -0.027324, 0.220500" makes no sense in the context of any of my frames that I can figure and furthermore, does NOT match the values read back from a call to getCurrentPose("my_frame"). In an attempt to isolate my issue I have tried following two cases, the first of which works and the latter that fails: Works -- geometry_msgs::PoseStamped debug = movegroup_.getCurrentPose(); debug.pose.position.x = debug.pose.position.x + 0.01; movegroup_.setPoseTarget(debug.pose); movegroup_.move(); Fails as mentioned above -- geometry_msgs::PoseStamped debug = movegroup_.getCurrentPose("my_frame"); debug.pose.position.x = debug.pose.position.x + 0.01; movegroup_.setPoseTarget(debug.pose, "my_frame"); movegroup_.move(); Interestingly, trying one more case... if I remove the line debug.pose.position.x = debug.pose.position.x + 0.01; and send an unmodified current pose of my_frame as the pose target I get a success in the form of "Goal constraints are already satisfied. No need to plan or execute any motions" This leads me to believe there is a rotational and/or reference frame discrepancy somewhere... am I missing something?

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 1441

Trending Articles



<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>