You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Aug 3, 2020. It is now read-only.
Actuators used in industrial robotic arms typically have a reasonably low inertia, which can be included in the link inertia. However, the actuator inertia has another important effect on the rigid body dynamics; namely, due to the gear ratio between the motor and the joint, the actuator inertia significantly contributes to the required torque to achieve a certain requested motion.
At the moment it seems that the URDF specification does not support the specification of such contribution of motor inertia. I think it could be well-placed in the tag.
Some relevant questions for the discussion:
Am I missing out on something (actuator inertia is supported)?
If not, is it in accordance to the philosophy behind URDF to include actuator inertia in the specification?
If so, do you agree it should be place in the element?
Thanks in advance for your input.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Actuators used in industrial robotic arms typically have a reasonably low inertia, which can be included in the link inertia. However, the actuator inertia has another important effect on the rigid body dynamics; namely, due to the gear ratio between the motor and the joint, the actuator inertia significantly contributes to the required torque to achieve a certain requested motion.
At the moment it seems that the URDF specification does not support the specification of such contribution of motor inertia. I think it could be well-placed in the tag.
Some relevant questions for the discussion:
Thanks in advance for your input.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: