Ask Your Question
1

Multiple action clients to one server and correct preemption notifications

asked 2016-05-27 18:19:53 -0500

updated 2016-05-28 04:17:31 -0500

I have a JointTrajectoryController controlling some joints of a robot arm. Per default, a camera control node commands these joints to pan and tilt a camera. It uses the available action interface for that. The joints are however also part of a manipulator chain, so when the arm is commanded to move via MoveIt! I want this command from move_group to preempt the camera control node, notifying it that it got preempted and thus stopping it from sending any more Action goals. While this sounds easy enough in theory, it seems things don't quite work as I expected/hoped.

Given that when sending a goal, a action client always generates a goal ID (seems to be true for simple as well as "normal" clients), I thought that it should be possible to distinguish between state transitions by the node's client and those from other clients by looking at this ID (e.g. by remembering the latest one sent and comparing it those from all incoming state transitions). It seems this is not exposed anywhere in the action client code, however. What is available is a GoalHandle, so I thought that this can be used, internally also representing the goal ID. This does not seem to be the case, however.

When sending a goal from the action client in my node, I save the goal handle:

  latest_gh_ = joint_traj_client_->sendGoal(goal, boost::bind(&CamJointTrajControl::transistionCb, this, _1));

In the transition callback, I compare the saved goal handle to the one provided by the callback. My hope was that transitions triggered by calls from other clients would fail the comparison to the saved one:

void CamJointTrajControl::transistionCb(actionlib::ClientGoalHandle<control_msgs::FollowJointTrajectoryAction> gh)
{
  if (!(gh == latest_gh_)){
    ROS_ERROR("Different goal handles!");
  }
}

This however never outputs the ROS_ERROR message, no matter if I preempt the controllers using the rqt GUI (via the command interface) or if I perform planning using move_group (which uses the action interface, but from a different client).

I thus have two questions:

  • When are two GoalHandle objects supposed to be different from each other/When is operator== useful for them?
  • What is the proper way of making different action clients aware the server has been preempted
    correctly?

Experimental code is available in the debug_preemption_issue branch here.

/edit: It seems that this Q/A on SimpleActionClient callback for pre-empted goals is somewhat similar to what I want to achieve. Can't say I like the answers there though :D

edit retag flag offensive close merge delete

1 Answer

Sort by ยป oldest newest most voted
3

answered 2016-05-31 03:07:25 -0500

updated 2020-07-03 06:59:43 -0500

Ok I think I found a workable solution for my scenario. Instead of the SimpleActionClient I now use the standard ActionClient and push all goal handles for the goals I send to a list. This way my transition callback gets called for all goal handles I ever sent. In the transition callback I check my list for DONE goal handles and remove those. In case the list of goal handles is empty after this, that means the Action Server preempted the last goal send from within my node due to receiving a new command from "somebody" else.

See transistionCb here.

/edit: To explain the issue from the original question: Instead of list of goal handles, a single one was used there, which meant that the transition callback for the older ones would never be called due to the goal handle object pointing to them getting overwritten and thus destructed.

edit flag offensive delete link more

Your Answer

Please start posting anonymously - your entry will be published after you log in or create a new account.

Add Answer

Question Tools

3 followers

Stats

Asked: 2016-05-27 18:19:53 -0500

Seen: 1,496 times

Last updated: Jul 03 '20