Skip to content

GitLab

  • Menu
Projects Groups Snippets
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
    • Contribute to GitLab
  • Sign in / Register
  • S sot-talos-balance
  • Project information
    • Project information
    • Activity
    • Labels
    • Members
  • Repository
    • Repository
    • Files
    • Commits
    • Branches
    • Tags
    • Contributors
    • Graph
    • Compare
  • Issues 34
    • Issues 34
    • List
    • Boards
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
  • Merge requests 0
    • Merge requests 0
  • CI/CD
    • CI/CD
    • Pipelines
    • Jobs
    • Schedules
  • Deployments
    • Deployments
    • Environments
    • Releases
  • Monitor
    • Monitor
    • Incidents
  • Packages & Registries
    • Packages & Registries
    • Container Registry
  • Analytics
    • Analytics
    • Value stream
    • CI/CD
    • Repository
  • Wiki
    • Wiki
  • Snippets
    • Snippets
  • Activity
  • Graph
  • Create a new issue
  • Jobs
  • Commits
  • Issue Boards
Collapse sidebar
  • loco-3d
  • sot-talos-balance
  • Issues
  • #101

Closed
Open
Created Sep 09, 2019 by Gabriele Buondonno@gbuondonMaintainer

Provide rho and phase files for test trajectories.

On my fork, in test_dcm_zmp_control_distribute.py, I am testing the control scheme with the QP problem resolution. This is a preliminary step for implementing the foot admittance.

This scheme needs two additional parameters: phase and rho.

Phase is an integer which is equal to zero during double support phase, while during the single support phase it is negative when on the right foot and positive when on the left foot.

Rho is a parameter rho=F_{zl}/(F_{zl}+F_{zr}), where F_{zl} and F_{zr} are the contact force on the right foot and on the left foot along the z-axis of the foot itself.

These should be put in two files: Phase.txt and Rho.txt, along with the others.

I managed to extract the phase from the Foot trajectories and recreate the file Phase.txt as needed. For rho, I followed a very simple heuristics (smooth transition from 0.4 to 0.6), which enabled me to partially validate the scheme in simulation, but it would be nice to have some more sensible values based on the dynamics as an output of the pattern generator. @ostasse, could you provide them?

By the way, I've just noticed there is a small error in my files at the end, I will fix this ASAP.

Edited Sep 10, 2019 by Gabriele Buondonno
Assignee
Assign to
Time tracking