Closed andermi closed 1 year ago
Impressive job. I will run and test on friday afternoon.
Everything is passing except the hardcoded coeffs files in the heaveonly
& pitchonly
tests, as well as the experiment_comparison
test. I think I will temporarily ignore mean piston position, adjust the spring to match the testbench, then put the desired mean piston position back and give the OK on whatever the spring looks like in the comparison test. Thoughts?
Running nicely for me. As for the tests, I will take to improve the hard-coded paths. For the experiment comparison, as you suggest seems fine. Choices seem to be to have the experiment comparison not match in pressure, or have the default piston position be pretty low. mean position as a launch file argument that would allow the experiment test to set it where it needs to? I think that's a bigger discussion about how/where all of these burgeoning parameters can be set from... Monday.
mean position as a launch file argument that would allow the experiment test to set it where it needs to?
Yeah we could definitely do that -- good idea!
should be all set!
@hamilton8415 Go ahead and merge if you'd like to
may now specify desired mean piston position in empy
to test, in a sourced terminal:
and in another sourced terminal:
and check that range_finder settles close to the desired default value of 0.7m
can also define other values:
should settle close to 0.9m
Also added to batch parameters and model regen in tests
TODO: