Home | Tutorials | Wiki | Issues
Ask Your Question

asomerville's profile - activity

2020-05-28 10:32:07 -0500 edited question Is the pain of trying to get heightmaps working worth it?

Is the pain of trying to get heightmaps working worth it? I've spent the last day and a half trying to get height maps w

2020-05-28 10:31:24 -0500 asked a question Is the pain of trying to get heightmaps working worth it?

Is the pain of trying to get heightmaps working worth it? I've spent the last day and a half trying to get height maps w

2020-05-27 16:44:16 -0500 commented answer Gazebo11 is always using default materials on Heightmaps?

I've tried the same, and it failed miserably. I used heightmap_dem.world. which comes with gazebo and it complains about

2020-05-14 15:40:31 -0500 edited question Subscriber message order

Subscriber message order Is there any expectation about the order that messages are sent or handled on receipt? I have

2020-05-14 15:40:02 -0500 edited question Subscriber message order

Subscriber message order Is there any expectation about the order that messages are sent or handled on receipt? I have

2020-05-14 15:39:30 -0500 asked a question Subscriber message order

Subscriber message order Is there any expectation about the order that messages are sent or handled on receipt? I have

2020-05-12 08:03:54 -0500 received badge  Popular Question (source)
2020-05-05 18:25:44 -0500 answered a question Did the symantics of how to do joint commands change for gazebo 10 or 11?

Apparently the JointCmd protobuf change was indeed the problem. The silent failure was frustrating. I don't really un

2020-05-04 23:12:37 -0500 asked a question With ign-gazebo making progress what is the recommended migration path & timing?

With ign-gazebo making progress what is the recommended migration path & timing? I spent the weekend trying to upgra

2020-05-04 23:05:46 -0500 asked a question Did the symantics of how to do joint commands change for gazebo 10 or 11?

Did the symantics of how to do joint commands change for gazebo 10 or 11? Just upgraded from Gazebo 9 to Gazebo 11. Got

2018-06-01 13:06:42 -0500 received badge  Famous Question (source)
2018-06-01 13:06:42 -0500 received badge  Notable Question (source)
2018-03-09 23:25:44 -0500 received badge  Famous Question (source)
2017-12-27 15:27:52 -0500 received badge  Popular Question (source)
2017-12-21 15:35:13 -0500 received badge  Enthusiast
2017-12-20 15:28:15 -0500 marked best answer Are both a gazebo node and an ignition node needed for gazebo8?

I was looking through the migration document here:

https://bitbucket.org/osrf/gazebo/src...

And while it includes a lot of specific information, it doesn't provide much conceptual information. After reading into the code I'm coming to the conclusion that in places where you might historically only need a gazebo::transport::node and gazebo::transport::publisher we may now need a parallel ignition::transport::node and ignition::transport::publisher along side each which seems unfortunate (though perhaps only necessary in transition), but I can't find any specific information to corroborate what I think I've found via inspection.

Are both types of nodes and publishers needed for the time being?

Will gazebo eventually only use one or the other?

Is there another migration document which either guides people through the changed necessary in their code, or explains on a conceptual basis what has changed and will need updating?

2017-12-20 15:27:05 -0500 commented answer Are both a gazebo node and an ignition node needed for gazebo8?

I needed ignition transport for joint_cmd topic connected to the JointController. In Gazebo8, publishing to old relativ

2017-12-20 15:26:46 -0500 received badge  Notable Question (source)
2017-12-20 15:22:39 -0500 edited answer Are both a gazebo node and an ignition node needed for gazebo8?

[Deleted. Accidentally put reply as answer]

2017-12-20 15:20:45 -0500 edited answer Are both a gazebo node and an ignition node needed for gazebo8?

Thanks for the question. A gazebo node and an ignition node are both not required for gazebo8, depending on your use cas

2017-12-20 15:17:23 -0500 edited answer Are both a gazebo node and an ignition node needed for gazebo8?

[Accidentally replied to answer in answer. Cannot delete.]

2017-12-20 15:15:45 -0500 answered a question Are both a gazebo node and an ignition node needed for gazebo8?

Thanks! The place I ended up using ignition transport was for the joint_cmd topic connected to the JointController. Af

2017-12-20 11:52:50 -0500 received badge  Popular Question (source)
2017-12-19 20:28:40 -0500 edited question Have the semantics of ImageData coming from a depth camera changed between Gazebo7 and Gazebo8?

Have the semantics of ImageData coming from a depth camera changed between Gazebo7 and Gazebo8? We use a plugin to grab

2017-12-19 19:24:14 -0500 asked a question Have the semantics of ImageData coming from a depth camera changed between Gazebo7 and Gazebo8?

Have the semantics of ImageData coming from a depth camera changed between Gazebo7 and Gazebo8? We use a plugin to grab

2017-12-18 20:54:37 -0500 asked a question What are/are there caveats in using multiple transport::node objects in a single process?

What are/are there caveats in using multiple transport::node objects in a single process? In our code base I've seen a p

2017-12-18 17:58:48 -0500 asked a question Are both a gazebo node and an ignition node needed for gazebo8?

Are both a gazebo node and an ignition node needed for gazebo8? I was looking through the migration document here: http

2017-03-01 15:37:57 -0500 received badge  Notable Question (source)
2017-03-01 15:37:57 -0500 received badge  Popular Question (source)
2017-03-01 15:37:57 -0500 received badge  Famous Question (source)
2016-08-11 13:59:30 -0500 commented answer What is the expected effect of pose tag on links defined within a sub-model when links are parented across model lines

Thanks. I'll see if I can produce a minimal example.

2016-08-11 10:24:39 -0500 asked a question What is the expected effect of pose tag on links defined within a sub-model when links are parented across model lines

Using the include tag to include an sdf file containing a model allows you to make use of the posetag. However, the semantics are unclear, I've been unable to find a sufficient reference on the subject (sdformat.org does not provide complete semantics), and apparently inconsistent across sensors (more on that at the end)

If you have a pair of nested models main_model and sub_model where sub_model has a link sub_model::test_link and main_model has a joint that parents sub_model::test_link is a child of main_model::main_link, what is the effect of a pose tag on sub_model (either directly or via an include tag).

Experimentally, I can see at least visually it appears that the pose tag of the model transforms links defined within even if they are parented externally. With that in mind, I haven't been able to form a reasonable mental model of how the TF tree would look.

Importantly, the thing that lead to this investigation: the sonar sensor at least appears not to be affected and thus can mismatch the mechanical and visual simulations.

Context:

  • Gazebo 7.0.0
  • Using Gazebo without ROS

So before I go down a potentially deep rabbit hole, my questions are:

  • Is anything I've said blatently incorrect
  • What is the expected semantics of a model's pose tag on links defined within but parented externally?
  • Are there any known issues with the sonar sensor respecting the semantics of the model definition?
  • Are there any good references where I can find the answers. (I've tried reading the source, but
2016-03-29 14:34:43 -0500 received badge  Enlightened (source)
2016-03-29 14:34:43 -0500 received badge  Good Answer (source)
2016-03-14 21:08:08 -0500 received badge  Famous Question (source)
2015-10-31 12:30:49 -0500 marked best answer Way to avoid gazebo calling gettimeofday so much?

After having performance problems I ran sysprof along side gazebo and noticed that > 40% of the cpu resources being used up were for calls to sys_clock_gettime() via gettimeofday() via gazebo::common::Time::GetWallTime()

This seems unusual. Is this an indication that I've something mis-configured? Is there a way to mitigate this?

gazebo-1.2.6

2015-10-31 12:12:56 -0500 marked best answer Is it possible to reduce inertial sensor noise by adjusting gazebo parameters?

We've noticed that the IMU and force-torque sensors are extremely noisy (well beyond expectation for real sensors). I imagine this is likely a result of the normal imperfections of simulating physics in discrete time steps.

Are there parameters that we can adjust to significantly improve the fidelity of the simulation (perhaps at cost of a much slower simulation)?

Related, but not quite the same question:
* http://answers.gazebosim.org/question/530/gazebo-imu-noise-possible-imu-bug-gazebo-131

2015-10-31 12:12:33 -0500 marked best answer What is the correct way to bring up the atlas in the latest drcsim-groovy?

This may end up needing to be a bug report instead of a question but:

I can't figure out how to bring up the atlas drcsim in the latest drcsim-groovy (3.2.0-1~precise)

When attempting:

roslaunch drcsim_gazebo atlas.launch

I get:

setting /run_id to 90cf90b2-d53d-11e3-a4b9-0025648c7b5e
process[rosout-1]: started with pid [30559]
started core service [/rosout]
process[gazebo-2]: started with pid [30573]
process[atlas_robot_state_publisher-3]: started with pid [30578]
process[multisense_sl_robot_state_publisher-4]: started with pid [30598]
[DEBUG] [ros.gazebo_ros.api_plugin]: GazeboRosApiPlugin Deconstructor start
[DEBUG] [ros.gazebo_ros.api_plugin]: After sigint_event unload
[DEBUG] [ros.gazebo_ros.api_plugin]: Deconstructor skipped because never loaded
process[tf2_buffer_server-5]: started with pid [30623]
[gazebo-2] process has finished cleanly
...

and then a bunch of multisense_sl processes which stay up. The launch itself stays up until I interrupt it, but gazebo never comes up.

I've also tried:

# rosrun drcsim_gazebo run_gazebo atlas.world

Which results in:

[DEBUG] [ros.gazebo_ros.api_plugin]: GazeboRosApiPlugin Deconstructor start
[DEBUG] [ros.gazebo_ros.api_plugin]: After sigint_event unload
[DEBUG] [ros.gazebo_ros.api_plugin]: Deconstructor skipped because never loaded
[ /opt/ros/groovy/share/drcsim_gazebo/launch ]
#

I've checked the logs and see nothing suspicious. Since I can't find any errors or warnings, I'm not sure how to debug this situation.

Looking into drcsim_gazebo run_gazebo I see that it simply calls which ever gazebo the shell resolves.

#!/bin/sh

# First argument should be a fully-qualified path to a .world file
# (e.g., `rospack find drcsim_gazebo`/worlds/atlas.world)
# or a world that's install in $GAZEBO_RESOURCE_PATH/worlds/atlas
#`rospack find gazebo_worlds`/scripts/gdbrun gzserver -s libgazebo_ros_api_plugin.so $1
gazebo -s libgazebo_ros_api_plugin.so $@

Running gazebo by it self results in nothing. Runs and quits. No error.

# gazebo && echo true
true
[ /opt/ros/groovy/share/drcsim_gazebo/scripts ]
#

And it seems to be the correct gazebo:

# which gazebo
/usr/bin/gazebo

# dpkg -S $(which gazebo)
gazebo3: /usr/bin/gazebo

# dpkg -l $(dpkg -S $(which gazebo) | cut -d ':' -f1)
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name                               Version                            Description
+++-==================================-==================================-====================================================================================
ii  gazebo3                            3.0.0-1~precise                    Open Source Robotics Simulator
2015-05-10 23:18:24 -0500 received badge  Nice Answer (source)
2015-03-12 00:26:10 -0500 received badge  Famous Question (source)
2015-03-12 00:26:10 -0500 received badge  Notable Question (source)
2015-01-15 12:49:49 -0500 received badge  Nice Answer (source)
2014-11-13 10:36:52 -0500 marked best answer Can someone with > 15 karma up-vote a few of the decent questions? Karma needed to bootstrap participation.

It's not possible to vote for questions or answers without first having 15 karma. However since no question has been up-voted the vast majority of users are unable to participate in voting.

According to the user list there are only 6 people who can currently vote:

http://answers.gazebosim.org/users/

I know the gazebo devs are very busy. If the rest of us can vote we'll be able to help tend to answers.gazeboim.org and relieve the burden a bit.