Closed pauldeee closed 1 year ago
Hi @pauldeee, I think this is the LIO-SAM issue. There is some extrinsic between the LiDAR and the imu in the LIO-SAM configuration. Please make sure you have the point cloud and the corresponding poses in the same frame, i.e., both in the LiDAR body frame or the imu frame.
Hi @samsdolphin,
I figured it out. The documentation states the pose file should have the format tx ty tz qw qx qy qz
.
When I switch my file to have the poses in the format tx ty tz qx qy qz qw
it works.
Thanks!
Sorry, I may have spoken too soon.
It seems while the change I made allows the visualize.launch
to work correctly, hba.launch
does not produce the expected results...
visualize.launch
After running hba.launch
with the default values then running visualize.launch
again:
Hi @pauldeee, maybe you could share your point cloud and poses so I can figure out which parameters are suitable for your case? It looks very weird the overall point cloud quality decreases so badly after just one iteration :(
Hi @samsdolphin,
Here is a link to some test data: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1tn7ZFGnVPS39j8jd3yWux9ykgKQkKUXV?usp=sharing
This works fine with the visualize.launch
. Could it be a TF issue that's causing it not to work with the hba.launch
even though it works fine with the visualize.launch
?
Thanks!
Hi @pauldeee, I checked your data and I found only 97 poses (pcds). If this is your total number of point clouds, I would suggest you use the BALM directly as HBA is designed to handle large-scale point cloud mapping, e.g, 1K or 10K or more poses.
I also encountered the same problem as you. Could you please tell me how you modified the code of liosam?
When using poses from the GTSAM graph with LIO-SAM the point clouds are not aligned properly.
Any ideas how to fix this?
Thanks