ROS Resources: Documentation | Support | Discussion Forum | Index | Service Status | ros @ Robotics Stack Exchange |
1 | initial version |
So I think I "Solved" my problem. The Joint_state_publisher doesn't support Revolute type joints.
it very much does support revolute
joints.
I believe the issue here is the following (taken from joint1
):
lower="1.5707" upper="1.5707"
It doesn't make much sense to me to have joints with a limit that is identical for both the lower and upper limit. This essentially means that the joint cannot move (or rotate in this case).
I haven't checked, but I wouldn't be surprised if joint_state_publisher
filters out joints that have limits configured like that.
2 | No.2 Revision |
So I think I "Solved" my problem. The Joint_state_publisher doesn't support Revolute type joints.
it very much does does support revolute
joints.
I believe the issue here is the following (taken from joint1
):
lower="1.5707" upper="1.5707"
It doesn't make much sense to me to have joints with a limit that is identical for both the lower and upper limit. This essentially means that the joint cannot move (or rotate in this case).
I haven't checked, but I wouldn't be surprised if joint_state_publisher
filters out joints that have limits configured like that.
Edit: speculating, but I believe I can think of where the confusion comes from: the lower
and upper
attributes of the limit
element do not specify a negative and positive limit necessarily. If that was the case, setting both to 1
(fi) would translate into a limit of (-1, 1)
. That is not how this works.
Instead, you have to specify whether either limit is negative or positive. So if your joint1
has a limit of half a pi in both directions, you'd need to have lower="-1.5707"
and upper="1.5707"
.
3 | No.3 Revision |
So I think I "Solved" my problem. The Joint_state_publisher doesn't support Revolute type joints.
it very much does support revolute
joints.
I believe the issue here is the following (taken from joint1
):
lower="1.5707" upper="1.5707"
It doesn't make much sense to me to have joints with a limit that is identical for both the lower and upper limit. This essentially means that the joint cannot move (or rotate in this case).
I haven't checked, but I wouldn't be surprised if joint_state_publisher
filters out joints that have limits configured like that.
Edit: speculating, but I believe I can think of where the confusion comes from: the lower
and upper
attributes of the limit
element do not specify a negative and positive limit necessarily. If that was the case, setting both to 1
(fi) would translate into a limit of
. That is not how this works.(-1, 1)[-1, 1]
Instead, you have to specify whether either limit is negative or positive. So if your joint1
has a limit of half a pi in both directions, you'd need to have lower="-1.5707"
and upper="1.5707"
.
It would also be perfectly valid to have both upper
and lower
set to positive values, such as lower="1"
and upper="2"
. In such a case it would just mean that the joint does not allow any negative joint angles, and that all rotations are limited to be between 1
and 2
radians.