Anyone with some robotics experience able to explain more about the floating base inverse dynamics control system and what sort of accommodations make it so much more powerful than PD?
I don't know too many specifics, but it looks like their PD example was controlling the joint position. That means that if the ground isn't where the robot expects it to be, the leg will still assume the same position and cause the robot to fall over.
The dynamic force control system is, instead of controlling the leg position, controlling the amount of force that the leg is exerting on the ground. This means that the leg may end up in a different position than the walking controller intended, but the overall effect on the main body should be similar to what was expected.
Comments
Anyone with some robotics experience able to explain more about the floating base inverse dynamics control system and what sort of accommodations make it so much more powerful than PD?
I don't know too many specifics, but it looks like their PD example was controlling the joint position. That means that if the ground isn't where the robot expects it to be, the leg will still assume the same position and cause the robot to fall over.
The dynamic force control system is, instead of controlling the leg position, controlling the amount of force that the leg is exerting on the ground. This means that the leg may end up in a different position than the walking controller intended, but the overall effect on the main body should be similar to what was expected.