The repeated bones in the pedestrian attributes describe the position and orientation of skeleton bones for pedestrian animation. So pedestrians can be positioned with gestures in sensor simulation. But for radar and FMCW lidar simulation, we also need information about the velocity of the bone movements to calculate the doppler value.
Describe the solution you would like
Adding an orientation rate to the bone class would be enough. The translatory velocity of the bones can be calculated with the orientation rate of the parent bones.
Describe alternatives you have considered
The sensor model could calculate the velocity of the bones itself by deriving it from the orientation change between two time steps. However, calculating the velocity should be part of the dynamics simulation, analog to the vehicle velocity and orientation rate. This will ensure, that all sensor models have the same velocity data and will overall be more accurate.
Describe the backwards compatibility
I propose to simply add a field, so there is no issue with backwards compatibility.
Describe the feature
The repeated bones in the pedestrian attributes describe the position and orientation of skeleton bones for pedestrian animation. So pedestrians can be positioned with gestures in sensor simulation. But for radar and FMCW lidar simulation, we also need information about the velocity of the bone movements to calculate the doppler value.
Describe the solution you would like
Adding an orientation rate to the bone class would be enough. The translatory velocity of the bones can be calculated with the orientation rate of the parent bones.
Describe alternatives you have considered
The sensor model could calculate the velocity of the bones itself by deriving it from the orientation change between two time steps. However, calculating the velocity should be part of the dynamics simulation, analog to the vehicle velocity and orientation rate. This will ensure, that all sensor models have the same velocity data and will overall be more accurate.
Describe the backwards compatibility
I propose to simply add a field, so there is no issue with backwards compatibility.