Skip to content
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

Feature negative speed #3

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jun 29, 2023
Merged

Feature negative speed #3

merged 5 commits into from
Jun 29, 2023

Conversation

SebastianSvanland
Copy link

@SebastianSvanland SebastianSvanland commented Jun 28, 2023

Switched controller and added support for negative speeds. Works towards: DAG-465

@seifbourogaa
Copy link

LGTM but Github building tools not liking it. ;)

@SebastianSvanland
Copy link
Author

Yes, I noticed that too. I think it mostly complains about code from syncing with the main repo and not the parts I added in this branch. The syncing never went through any checks since it wasn't handled as a PR so the checks notice it now

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
import carla

from srunner.scenariomanager.actorcontrols.external_control import ExternalControl
from srunner.scenariomanager.actorcontrols.npc_vehicle_control import NpcVehicleControl
from srunner.scenariomanager.actorcontrols.simple_vehicle_control import SimpleVehicleControl
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Will this simple controller affect any other scenarios? I.e. will it always work as intended?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The problem is that none of the controllers are optimal but this simple controller is the better of the two imo. The previous controller uses a PID controller to steer the vehicle both lateral and longitudinal which results in some response time (suboptimal for a scenariorunner imo). The new controller sets the velocity and angular velocity of the vehicle directly and thus makes the ScenarioRunner focus more on the scenario itself rather than following a trajectory to the best of its ability. The PID controller might be more "realistic" in a sense, but demands a lot of tuning to work half as good as the real controllers in a car. So in the end it's not really more realistic anyway.

@SebastianSvanland
Copy link
Author

There is a PR towards this branch that needs to be implemented regardless of these changes, but I branched it out from this branch so it needs to be merged here first.
PR: #4

@SebastianSvanland SebastianSvanland merged commit 318a5d8 into master Jun 29, 2023
1 of 3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants