Declare configured IMU topics in vehicle models - #54
Open
yeseorizi wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Declare the IMU sensor topic expected by each vehicle's
ros_gz_bridgeconfiguration.Problem
The five vehicle descriptors contain an IMU sensor but do not set its
<topic>. Gazebo therefore publishes IMU data on an automatically generated sensor path such as:The corresponding
robot_config.pyfiles bridge a different, stable topic:The ROS bridge endpoint is created, but it receives no messages because no Gazebo publisher exists on the configured topic.
Change
Add the configured IMU topic to these model descriptors:
bluerov2bluerov2_heavybluerov2_heavy_multibeam_sonarglider_slocumrexrovNo bridge names, message types, update rates, poses, or sensor parameters are changed.
Reproduction
Launch a vehicle and compare the configured topic with the Gazebo sensor topics:
Before the change, the default Gazebo sensor path publishes data while the configured short topic remains silent.
Validation
The topic correction was checked across all five affected descriptors:
rexrov: the patched run received all seven expected state/sensor streams, including IMUglider_slocum: the patched run received all six expected state/sensor streams, including IMUbluerov2: IMU payload received on/model/bluerov2/imubluerov2_heavy: IMU payload received on/model/bluerov2_heavy/imubluerov2_heavy_multibeam_sonar: a fresh ARM64 Docker run received an IMU payload on/model/bluerov2_heavy_multibeam_sonar/imu; the message contained orientation, angular velocity, and linear acceleration fieldsThe unpatched BlueROV sensor-contract run also confirmed that the default Gazebo IMU path had real data while all three configured short-name IMU topics were silent.
Repository checks:
Checklist