On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Jack O'Quin wrote: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Armin Hornung > wrote: >> On 2012-01-18 15:02, Thomas Moulard wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Armin Hornung >>>  wrote: > >> With the new sketch the gripper frames are much clearer! Is there a >> rationale in using x going "up" in this case (collinear) and y "towards" the >> object? With REP-103 I would say that x forward and z up is much more >> intuitive ("in relation to a body" would hereby relate to the gripper / end >> effector). Maybe someone familiar with the existing grapsing pipeline(s) can >> chime in here. > > I like that sketch, but agree with Armin that the coordinate axes > shown there are quite surprising. > > REP-0103 says: > >  "In relation to a body the standard is: x forward, y left, z up". > > While "up" may seem arbitrary for a gripper, "forward" suggests the > direction to which it is extended. Sorry for the delay. What would be your proposition, removing the scheme and just adding that the frames is oriented as X toward the object and Y the object main axis? -- Thomas Moulard