> > The limits should definitely be pluggable to account at least for angular > limits of ball joints etc. > BTW some standard cone workspace for AB axes would be OK for many parallel > robots. > > But usual kinematics module seems enough for velocities and accelerations > check if the planner could perform it.
My 2 cents: I like the idea of a reachability check, but I'm not sure the limit check is the right place for it. A common way to measure reachability for a robot like a 6DOF arm is with a pre-computed reachability space. First, you sample a bunch of robot poses, rejecting any poses that are in collision. The ones that are left (and the corresponding workspace positions) are your reachable space. When you run the reachability check, if your pose is near enough to one of these points, then it's a reachable pose. There are simplifications you can make for cases like the linear delta robot, but fundamentally this is a search problem, which means many (possibly slow) steps. In my opinion, the limit check is really just there to keep the axes from going past their physical limits. Even on a trivial case like a CNC mill, there are "dead" spots that you can't easily check for (such as a big vise in the middle of the table!). Your part program is designed to avoid the fixture, but ultimately it's an act of faith to hit play. -Rob ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
