-
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
Modifying the UR Kinematics Plugin so that it works with multiple UR-X arms on a robot #247
Projects
Comments
This was referenced Feb 13, 2018
I believe this is actually partly an issue (still) with MoveIt: it won't load multiple instances of the same IK plugin, so the prefix is indeed only read once. |
ipa-nhg
pushed a commit
to ipa-nhg/universal_robot
that referenced
this issue
Jul 2, 2019
…example function (ros-industrial#247) Squashed commits: * Add "program_running" status publisher * Add documentation and example * Add isProgramRunning() example function * Publish robot internal data * Change error return value in isProgramRunning * Throw exception in isProgramRunning * Insert missed timeout check, prettify * Decrease verbosity * Move RobotModeDataMsg to ur_msgs * clang format * Correct typos, add tested environment * Remove convenience header * Correct typo
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
As it stands, the planner loads joints based on a prefix + joint name. This is an issue when using 2+ arms on a robot, since the plugin can only read the arm prefix parameter once, which there has to be 2 different prefixes set at (more for each arm) so that the plugin can differentiate between joints it loads.
Thus, the only solution is to run two different moveit_configs and/or different namespaces for all of the move_group configurations which is redundant.
A better solution would be to change the UR kinematics plugin so that it is joint agnostic. Is this possible? I'm looking through the code right now, and I'll post my thoughts, but I thought I should ask those who maintain/have written it first.
@kphawkins
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: