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

Some question about the code to calculate the velocity #7

Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mo704507064
Copy link

vel_buff = (omni_state->position * 3 - 4 * omni_state->pos_hist1
+ omni_state->pos_hist2) / 0.002; //mm/s, 2nd order backward dif
omni_state->velocity = (.2196 * (vel_buff + omni_state->inp_vel3)
+ .6588 * (omni_state->inp_vel1 + omni_state->inp_vel2)) / 1000.0
- (-2.7488 * omni_state->out_vel1 + 2.5282 * omni_state->out_vel2
- 0.7776 * omni_state->out_vel3); //cutoff freq of 20 Hz
The code above to calculate the velocity, I'm confused about what that means? can you tell me something about that?

sven-bock and others added 9 commits September 23, 2016 11:30
intergrated urdf model from francesco to the controller of dane.

renamed some phantom omni stuff to geomagic (not all)

added a few parameters in the launch file
added a hint for zero joint values
rviz won't display the robot model if the parameter pointing to
geomagic_description/urdf/omni.urdf is missing. RobotModel will
throw the error: "Parameter [Geomagic_robot_description] does not exist,
and was not found by searchParam()".
Add parameter "Geomagic_robot_description" from headless to rviz launch
@danepowell
Copy link
Owner

danepowell commented Apr 10, 2019

This was many years ago so I can't really say for sure. But based on the code comments it looks like maybe I was applying a low-pass filter to clean up the velocity signal (attenuate signal >20hz), and using a 2nd order backwards differential estimation, since directly estimating velocity from a series of high-frequency position signals is pretty noisy.

By the way, this repo is unmaintained so if you have suggested improvements you should probably fork it. Thanks :)

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants