You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
All the blocks which require a position input have dimension 16 + DoFs.
The 16 dim is the Frame object associated with the base.
I think we should move to use quaternion + displacement (then dim = 7) instead of specifying the whole matrix (which in my opinion does not make any sense because it is not a free matrix. There are constraints on the values we can put into it)
Popping in because of a prior discussion with @traversaro. I personally
prefer rotation matrix as it leaves a simple typecast to a Frame object
available to the end user. Even a quaternion is not a free R^4 vector, it
is constrained. However quaternion has an issue that its not obvious unless
someone looks up documentation if its a axis-angle or a quaternion. Even
then, there are 2 quaternion conventions : real followed by imaginary
vector and vice versa. So could lead to misunderstandings...On the other
hand there is the advantage of number of variables returned...
Naveen Kuppuswamy, PhD
Post-doctoral Fellow,
Cognitive Humanoids Lab,
Department of Robotics, Brain and Cognitive Sciences (RBCS),
Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Genova, Italy
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Francesco Romano [email protected]
wrote:
All the blocks which require a position input have dimension 16 + DoFs.
The 16 dim is the Frame object associated with the base.
I think we should move to use quaternion + displacement (then dim = 7)
instead of specifying the whole matrix (which in my opinion does not make
any sense because it is not a free matrix. There are constraints on the
values we can put into it)
I prefer the element of SE(3) as input. What do you think of separating the orientation-translation of the base from the joint positions? In this case, we may take as input a 3x4 matrix (i.e. [R,t]) and an nth dimensional vector (i.e. qj).
All the blocks which require a position input have dimension 16 + DoFs.
The 16 dim is the Frame object associated with the base.
I think we should move to use quaternion + displacement (then dim = 7) instead of specifying the whole matrix (which in my opinion does not make any sense because it is not a free matrix. There are constraints on the values we can put into it)
cc @DanielePucci @traversaro
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: