-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 105
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Unit tests for motor control board #64
Comments
👍 Let's add @francesco-romano |
Refactoring old icub tests: https://github.com/robotology/robot-testing |
Relate to the velocityControllerTest, that test was initially done to debug a weird movement on a shoulder if I remember correctly. Then, to avoid losing it, it was placed in the repo in that folder because it was the place it could fit better, but it was done for a specific issue and not written with thhe idea to be compliant with the iCubTest infrastructure in mind. The idea was to generate different velocity profiles (sinusoidal, trapezoidal or whatever) to choose from using a config file, in order to test the motor on different conditions. Right now only the sinusoidal profile is implemented, can control 1 joint at time, and it simply sends trajectories, does not check for feedback (it does check for homing position to be reached). We can read encoders and velocities from encoder to compare with the references and fit it into iCubTest infrastructure if you think it is useful. |
Maybe this could become a test on the accuracy with which a joint is supposed to track a reference (cumulative error). It could be a way to ensure a certain level of quality in tuning gains. |
Yes, in the debug process the comparison was done by hand. |
It has been discussed several times that we need to implement a set of tests for the robot. In particular it is important to implement a set of tests for motor control board. Test should be runnable on the real robot and the simulator.
The icub-main already contains an unit-test like infrastructure for testing that was implemented for this purpose.
@traversaro @randaz81 @arocchi @barbalberto @EnricoMingo
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: