-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
Meshcat animation playback broken due to coupled joints #62
Comments
Hi @xEnVrE. I'm pretty happy you also use the visualizer ;) The problem here is related to iDynTree which cannot find the joint of the model. 😢 A possible solution is to load only the joints that can be actually found in the urdf model. Still, it is not clear to me how it can be done since we do not know the joints in advance |
It is a bit convoluted as we would accept to lose the animation of the joints for which there is a missing counterpart in the URDF while still showing all the others for which the joint name exists in the URDF. At the moment, instead, the tool stops working for all of them, of course. Do you think that including an optional list of joints to be excluded, to be populated by the user, is too much? |
Thanks @GiulioRomualdi. cc @PasMarra |
I am running the
robot-log-visualizer
on some data recorded in simulation with theergoCub
robot.The data is there - as I can see it from the plots - however the robot animation inside the Meshcat plugin is not moving.
While looking at the output inside the terminal I noticed the following:
Not sure if that is happening at the Meshcat level or somewhere else, e.g. when evaluating the pose of the meshes using the forward kinematics.
Nonetheless, the error makes sense as the joint
l_thumb_oc
, as many others inergoCubSN000
andergoCubSN001
, is just the name of a quantity that the user can control via YARP causing the motion of two distinct physical joints, namelyl_thumb_prox
andl_thumb_dist
. Indeed, these are also the name of such joints inside the URDF, as can be seen here and here.The solution to the above problem is probably connected to robotology/yarp#3026, whose implementation has just kicked off. Meanwhile, do you think it makes sense to provide something like a workaround?
Thank you
cc @GiulioRomualdi
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: