Hi Akhil,<br><br>This is actually something we've just started to seriously think about. At this point we don't do any continuous collision detection in our primary collision checking implementations, though Bullet supposedly can do it. We've mostly been using ODE. But you are right that a lot of the work in collision checking doesn't really address the needs of the robotics community. We're currently starting some collaboration with a goal of optimizing for several criteria that are important for our work here. One, we have large point clouds coming from our lasers and stereo pairs at high rates that we need to check collisions against; most of the existing collision checkers are not necessarily optimized for this, as the graphics community generally have meshes. We do have meshes for some things and also need that functionality. Second, our robots currently don't have GPUs but they do have a number of CPU cores which can potentially be utilized, so we are interested in speedups through parallelism; we will likely explore GPU implementations at some point in the future. Third, we want to be able to do proximity queries and not just binary collision/not collision queries. Finally, for some things we do need continuous collision detection, and an efficient implementation would be useful. To our knowledge no existing library fits our needs perfectly, and thus we are in the process of figuring out a short path to a library that will hopefully fill both our and the community's needs. And we will do a good deal of testing on the robots to show robustness. <br>
<br>If you or others have input on the kinds of features you want in a collision checking library we'd be very interested. And as any new libraries become available we'll certainly make folks aware. <br><br>-Gil<br>
<br>E. Gil Jones (<a href="mailto:gjones@willowgarage.com" target="_blank">gjones@willowgarage.com</a>)<br>Research Engineer<br>Willow Garage, Inc.<br>68 Willow Road<br>Menlo Park, CA 94025<br>650.475.9772<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Madhani, Akhil J <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Akhil.J.Madhani@disney.com">Akhil.J.Madhani@disney.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
I am wondering if there a consensus regarding continuous collision<br>
detection algorithms/libraries amongst the ROS community? Bullet,<br>
ODE..? What other libraries have been reviewed (e.g. Swift++)<br>
<br>
Since these has been developed for gaming/CG, robot folks have to ask<br>
about robustness: Are there any benchmarks for reliability?<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Akhil<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: <a href="mailto:ros-users-bounces@code.ros.org">ros-users-bounces@code.ros.org</a><br>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:ros-users-bounces@code.ros.org">ros-users-bounces@code.ros.org</a>] On Behalf Of<br>
<a href="mailto:ros-users-request@code.ros.org">ros-users-request@code.ros.org</a><br>
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 12:00 PM<br>
To: <a href="mailto:ros-users@code.ros.org">ros-users@code.ros.org</a><br>
Subject: ros-users Digest, Vol 3, Issue 91<br>
<br>
Send ros-users mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:ros-users@code.ros.org">ros-users@code.ros.org</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users" target="_blank">https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:ros-users-request@code.ros.org">ros-users-request@code.ros.org</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:ros-users-owner@code.ros.org">ros-users-owner@code.ros.org</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of ros-users digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. Re: Installation build failure: incompatible boost library<br>
(Jack O'Quin)<br>
2. EKF Error (sam weiss)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 13:39:41 -0500<br>
From: "Jack O'Quin" <<a href="mailto:jack.oquin@gmail.com">jack.oquin@gmail.com</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [ros-users] Installation build failure: incompatible<br>
boost library<br>
To: <a href="mailto:ros-users@code.ros.org">ros-users@code.ros.org</a><br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:AANLkTil60Ll3RSzgkmQYOURtVIJX3rl2mneSb7dTtf1T@mail.gmail.com">AANLkTil60Ll3RSzgkmQYOURtVIJX3rl2mneSb7dTtf1T@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1<br>
<br>
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Brian Gerkey <<a href="mailto:gerkey@willowgarage.com">gerkey@willowgarage.com</a>><br>
wrote:<br>
> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Jack O'Quin <<a href="mailto:jack.oquin@gmail.com">jack.oquin@gmail.com</a>><br>
wrote:<br>
>> Will the next Box Turtle update have explicit support for Lucid?<br>
><br>
> hi Jack,<br>
><br>
> We're working on it. ?Most of the patches are in, but we still need to<br>
> bring up a Lucid box for testing (most of us are still running Jaunty<br>
> or Karmic).<br>
<br>
That's what I figured. Thanks for the update.<br>
<br>
Meanwhile, several people have reported success installing the Karmic<br>
binary packages on Lucid. That's probably what they should do until an<br>
official Lucid package repository is available.<br>
--<br>
joq<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 14:48:59 -0400<br>
From: sam weiss <<a href="mailto:siw22@cornell.edu">siw22@cornell.edu</a>><br>
Subject: [ros-users] EKF Error<br>
To: <a href="mailto:ros-users@code.ros.org">ros-users@code.ros.org</a><br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:AANLkTim9jgZCPSnwnqiznB4jhVsW7lij88_pcCmQAuXY@mail.gmail.com">AANLkTim9jgZCPSnwnqiznB4jhVsW7lij88_pcCmQAuXY@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
<br>
We are currently trying to run the ros ekf package with two input<br>
sources,<br>
odom motor data, and gps data. The gps data is remapped to the visual<br>
odometry message. We are receiving this error when running the EKF:<br>
[ERROR] 1274121205.429497000: filter time older than vo message buffer<br>
<br>
What is the cause of this error?<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: /discuss/ros-users/attachments/20100517/46cb028b/attachment.html<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
ros-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ros-users@code.ros.org">ros-users@code.ros.org</a><br>
<a href="https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users" target="_blank">https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users</a><br>
<br>
<br>
End of ros-users Digest, Vol 3, Issue 91<br>
****************************************<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
ros-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ros-users@code.ros.org">ros-users@code.ros.org</a><br>
<a href="https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users" target="_blank">https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>