Datasets

Common methods for learning robot dynamics assume motion is continuous, causing unrealistic model predictions for systems undergoing discontinuous impact and stiction behavior. In this work, we resolve this conflict with a smooth, implicit encoding of the structure inherent to contact-induced discontinuities. Our method, ContactNets, learns parameterizations of inter-body signed distance and contact-frame Jacobians, a representation that is compatible with many simulation, control, and planning environments for robotics. We furthermore circumvent the need to differentiate through stiff or non-smooth dynamics with a novel loss function inspired by the principles of complementarity and maximum dissipation. Our method can predict realistic impact, non-penetration, and stiction when trained on 60 seconds of real-world data.

A realistic simulation environment is an essential tool in every roboticist’s toolkit, with uses ranging from planning and control to training policies with reinforcement learning. Despite the centrality of simulation in modern robotics, little work has been done to compare the performance of robotics simulators against real-world data, especially for scenarios involving dynamic motions with high speed impact events. Handling dynamic contact is the computational bottleneck for most simulations, and thus the modeling and algorithmic choices surrounding impacts and friction form the largest distinctions between popular tools. Here, we evaluate the ability of several simulators to reproduce real-world trajectories involving impacts. Using experimental data, we identify system-specific contact parameters of popular simulators Drake, MuJoCo, and Bullet, analyzing the effects of modeling choices around these parameters. For the simple example of a cube tossed onto a table, simulators capture inelastic impacts well while failing to capture elastic impacts. For the higher-dimensional case of a Cassie biped landing from a jump, the simulators capture the bulk motion well but the accuracy is limited by numerous model differences between the real robot and the simulators.