On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Jack O'Quin <
jack.oquin@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Armin Hornung
> <HornungA@informatik.uni-freiburg.de> wrote:
>> On 2012-01-18 15:02, Thomas Moulard wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Armin Hornung
>>> <HornungA@informatik.uni-freiburg.de> 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
(text/plain)