The site is read-only. Please transition to use Robotics Stack Exchange
| ROS Resources: Documentation | Support | Discussion Forum | Index | Service Status | ros @ Robotics Stack Exchange |
 | 1 | initial version |
I'm not sure, but I don't think its usually the case that manipulators expose a geometry_msgs/Twist interface. So i'd go for your option 3.
Most of the planners ROS uses out-of-the-box generate plans in joint space, so a trajectory_msgs/JointTrajectory interface would seem like a logical thing to have. You can probably look at some other implementations for inspiration.
| | 2 | No.2 Revision |
I'm not sure, but I don't think its usually the case that manipulators expose a geometry_msgs/Twist interface. So i'd go for your option 3.
Most of the planners ROS uses out-of-the-box generate plans in joint space, so a trajectory_msgs/JointTrajectory interface would seem like a logical thing to have. You can probably look at some other implementations for inspiration.
Edit: if you're starting from scratch: be sure to take a look at ros_control, and for arms/manipulators, the joint_trajectory_controller. Could save you a lot of work.
ROS Answers is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 license.
