Re: [ompl-users] Collision Checker PQP exception

[Rajaneesh <raj...@gm...>]

Thank you Mark... I saw bits of code in OMPL (<1.4.0) regarding PQP in
RigidBodyGeometry as below. Just was curious to try it out and see which
one is faster. Wanted to check if benchmark can be run for RRT with PQP and
compare it with RRT with FCL. In my understanding collision check is one of
the operation that consumes time.


Code Snippet below..

case PQP:
            if (mtype_ == Motion_2D)
                validitySvc_ =
std::make_shared<PQPStateValidityChecker<Motion_2D>>(si, geom, se,
selfCollision);
            else
                validitySvc_ =
std::make_shared<PQPStateValidityChecker<Motion_3D>>(si, geom, se,
selfCollision);
            break;


Regards
Rajaneesh

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 7:27 PM, Mark Moll <mm...@ri...> wrote:

> PQP is an optional dependency detected at build time. After you download
> and install PQP, you will have to rebuild OMPLapp.
>
> Generally, FCL is now the preferred collision checker. Is there any
> particular reason you prefer PQP over FCL?
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> On Jul 18, 2018, at 6:43 AM, Rajaneesh <raj...@gm...>
> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>   I changed the collision checker from FCL to PQP, to check the
> performance using the below
> setup.setStateValidityCheckerType(setup.getCollisionCheckerType().PQP)
>
> setup.getCollisionCheckerType() shows that PQP has been set. But I get
> the following exception.
>
> Should I download the PQP library separately?
>
>
> Error:   Unexpected collision checker type (0) encountered
>          at line 199 in /home/raj3/Downloads/omplapp-
> 1.3.2-Source/src/omplapp/geometry/RigidBodyGeometry.cpp
>
>
> Also is it possible to benchmark planners for different collision check
> algorithm like FCL and PQP using config file?
>
>
>