-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
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
Changes to the original loam_velodyne code #1
Comments
Hello Yoshua,
Nice to meet you, too. I am from Peru and I am doing my masters at
Universidad de Chile.
What I did was taking laboshinl's version with the last commit done by Adi
Shavit, which decouples ROS from the core LOAM algorithms. After that I
just modified ScanRegistration.cpp, MultiScanRegistration.cpp,
LaserOdometry.cpp and TransformMaintenance.cpp to get transform matrices
based on Eigen library instead of ROS odometry topics. Finally, I added a
main.cpp where I create instances of MultiScanRegistration, LaserOdometry,
LaserMapping and TransformMaintenance and call the functions I created
before to get the /integrated_to_init odometry topic as a transform matrix.
I use that matrix to compare the odometry with the ground-truth of the
KITTI Dataset, but I am not getting good results.
Your collaboration would be great given that I am using this algorithm for
my master thesis.
Let me know If you want to make some change to my code or if you want to
create a new one.
Thanks.
El vie., 31 ago. 2018 a las 13:59, Yoshua Nava (<[email protected]>)
escribió:
… Hey,
I'm Yoshua, robotics engineer working in Zürich, Switzerland but
originally from Venezuela. Nice to meet you!
I'm interested in the work you're doing. I've been doing research on LiDAR
SLAM and loop closure detection, with the purpose of further increasing the
accuracy of LOAM, obtaining both globally consistent and locally accurate
maps. As you, I have observed that loam_velodyne from laboshinl doesn't
give highly accurate results as the ones claimed by Zhang et al in their
papers.
I wanted to ask you, first of all, what kind of changes you did to the
LOAM code, and if you took any of the existing LOAM forks as a starting
point (for example: laboshinl's fork, lego-loam, the original version from
zhang, martin-velas, etc). I would be interested in collaborating to make
the open source version of LOAM as accurate as possible.
Thank you.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1>, or mute the
thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKjpF0-Z2TGfjJbD8x0Bzg3zEUVRt8bmks5uWYekgaJpZM4WVtcQ>
.
--
Clayder Gonzalez Cadenillas
|
@claydergc I have done as you code. But a problem appeared.As follow: |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Hey,
I'm Yoshua, robotics engineer working in Zürich, Switzerland but originally from Venezuela. Nice to meet you!
I'm interested in the work you're doing. I've been doing research on LiDAR SLAM and loop closure detection, with the purpose of further increasing the accuracy of LOAM, obtaining both globally consistent and locally accurate maps. As you, I have observed that loam_velodyne from laboshinl doesn't give highly accurate results as the ones claimed by Zhang et al in their papers.
I wanted to ask you, first of all, what kind of changes you did to the LOAM code, and if you took any of the existing LOAM forks as a starting point (for example: laboshinl's fork, lego-loam, the original version from zhang, martin-velas, etc). I would be interested in collaborating to make the open source version of LOAM as accurate as possible.
Thank you.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: