Closed mebbaid closed 2 years ago
Actually, I think that we can target directly master
, right @GiulioRomualdi?
Nice! At this point isnt better to commits those gains directly in icub models?
Nice! At this point isn't better to commits those gains directly in icub models?
Ok, if you think it is better to commit there then sure. The guys from HSP were installing everything individually and not through the superbuild, so that makes sense.
Nice! At this point isnt better to commits those gains directly in icub models?
Let me know if this PR is corresponding to what you suggested. In which case we can merge/close this one perhaps.
Hi @mebbaid did you open a PR in icub-models-generator as suggested by @traversaro in https://github.com/robotology/icub-models/pull/126?
Can I close this PR?
Hi @GiulioRomualdi
The suggested PR is not opened yet. The halt is due to me not being able to verify the same good behaviour in a different machine used by the HSP team. So I am spending sometime tuning and was going to close once the other PR is opened.
Opened a corresponding PR in icub-model-generators
, see this PR.
Closing
Hi @GiulioRomualdi
The suggested PR is not opened yet. The halt is due to me not being able to verify the same good behaviour in a different machine used by the HSP team. So I am spending sometime tuning and was going to close once the other PR is opened.
after yesterdays issues during the meeting, now with a clean build, using master or devel, and with those pidparams, it seems the simulation is more reproducible and stable than before (see attached video)
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/36491318/153573524-4c82d5c2-8ec1-4c3c-a52f-97926c7b89c6.MP4
.