FRC Simulator Features Ideas

[gblake]

SWEET!

A couple of weeks ago, I randomly found some of the plans we made for expanding the 5th Gear simulator. I'll post some of that and/or exchange some emails with you guys.

With luck I'll find some API code I was working on too.

A few questions to create some context.....

• If you imagine a typical (weak) school computer, can that computer simulate one instance of one complex robot at real-world speeds? On that imaginary computer how often can the simulation update (in real world, wall clock time), and how much simulated (robot's imaginary world) time would each update represent?
• Do you have TCP/UDP interfaces for exporting the robot's externally visible and internal state, and for importing commands to control actuators?
• To simplify graphics processing, and computation in general, do you have a low fidelity mode for each robot?
• Do you have a Graphics-only executable for displaying multiple robots and game pieces on a field?
• Do you have an executable that can create an image (an updating array of pixels) that approximates what a robot mounted camera would see? What about scenery that would surround a field?

The answer to all of the above might be "No". If it is, that doesn't diminish that you are in the process of doing something really special.


Blake

[RyanCahoon]

I'm looking forward to playing with this.

What support are you offering for simulated sensors? Encoders, potentiometers, limit switches, range sensors like ultrasonics, gyros, cameras (as Blake previously mentioned)

Make it open source

Simulate battery and electric motor dynamics effects

Out of curiosity, what are you using as the physics engine?

[Rapture'sFinest]

Originally Posted by gblake

Do you have an executable that can create an image (an updating array of pixels) that approximates what a robot mounted camera would see? What about scenery that would surround a field?

This is a nifty linear algebra trick (projections from one dimensional space to another). OpenCV already has such as function, called projectPoints. While it isn't advisable to include such a big library such as opencv just to use one function, it is *open sourced.

*Crtl+f for "projectPoints" and you will find the source code for such a function
https://github.com/Itseez/opencv/blo...alibration.cpp

[asid61]

Solidworks support?
Seriously though, this sounds super cool. I'm going to have to learn Inventor for this.
Sensor support would be the main feature that would be good, or just some way to add sensors. Basic distance sensors and encoders (CPR on wheels) would be really useful.
Can the field have elevated portions, or just high-friction areas?

[pmax]

Originally Posted by asid61

Solidworks support?

(x-post w/ the Autodesk forum: http://autode.sk/1LcL1MM )

Inventor's new AnyCAD feature will let you keep master CAD files in the system of your choice, and open them in Inventor.
http://www.autodesk.com/products/inv...w/gallery-view

It would be good to test this out with a fully modeled SWx robot.

[Joe Ross]

Originally Posted by asid61

Solidworks support?

The FRCSim instructions were updated over the summer with solidworks exporting instructions. I expect that this capability will be beta tested this fall and released for next season.

Originally Posted by BXD Autodesk

Currently we do not and are not planning to fully support an API for automated tests in the upcoming release, but we have implemented a fake version of WPILib to simplify the interface between WPILib and the simulator. This could be extended to provide support for automated tests in later releases.

Will the API be similar to the simulator API for FRCSim?

[EDesbiens]

Adding labview support would be great

[gblake]

BXD Guys,

Is this diagram "What's in a simulated match?" close enough to the way you have viewed robots, fields and matches, for us to use it describing what you have/haven't produced?

I dislike the description I wrote when I posted the diagram, but at the time I uploaded the diagram, that description was the best compromise between work-in-progress and results-of-past-progress that my brain and fingers would type for me.

I do think that it is a useful diagram. I also fully realize that there is more than one way to skin the cat, and I'm curious if the diagram matches your group's approach.

If there is a match (or if you/we can create an different agreed diagram), then (I think) contributors to this thread will be able to post better suggestions and questions. I know that will be the case for me.

Blake