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

DART Integration in Gazebo 11 #1575

Open
trns1997 opened this issue Apr 19, 2021 · 0 comments
Open

DART Integration in Gazebo 11 #1575

trns1997 opened this issue Apr 19, 2021 · 0 comments

Comments

@trns1997
Copy link

Hey guys again,
I've been trying to fix up DART soft bodies in gazebo, and was wondering if I could get your opinions on the topic. I have already addressed the issue in the gazebo repo (gazebosim/gazebo-classic#2255 (comment)). But this time I tried to do a more comprehensive test where I compare the results from the DART tutorial and the integration in gazebo.

The Test:

  1. Box Size: 0.1 * 0.1 * 0.06
  2. Total Mass: 0.1736 kg
  3. SoftBody Mass: 0.044000 kg
  4. Drop height: 0.4 m

I basically replicated the mass and box size values from the DART tutorial into gazebo so the tests are consistent between the 2 simulations.

Here are my results:

box

dart_box

gazebo_box

So visually they seem similar, but the graph plots seem slightly different, I have a couple guesses to why:

  1. The collision detector I used in gazebo is FCL and in the dart tutorial I am not sure (you guys would know better). I tried using the DART collision detector but does not work, apparently it does not support SoftMeshShapes.
  2. The way I log. The log variable updates more often in the gazebo plugin than that in the dart tutorial, I wasn't sure how to do it in the dart tutorial soo I just logged the variable displayTimer method.

At steady state both force fz make sense and are pretty similar in both simulation instances with mean of 1.7011 N and 1.703016 N for gazebo and dart sim test respectively. Just not sure if that giant peak in the case of the gazebo simulation makes sense. Let me know what you guys think or have any suggestion.

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

1 participant