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

feat(behavior_path_planner, start_planner,goal_planner,lane_change,avoidance): implement a general behavior turn signal algorithm #6622

Conversation

danielsanchezaran
Copy link
Contributor

Description

This PR aims at generalizing the method by which the behavior_path modules compute their output TurnSignalInfo. The implementation is based on the original calcTurnSignal implementation by the avoidance module, with some extra boolean inputs to accommodate how different modules work (Lane change, for example, shifts the target lane and not the ego's current lane). The method also detects when the ego vehicle is stuck (because a stop wall, a pedestrian) and cancels the turn signal if the ego vehicle is close to finishing its shifted path.

I believe the generalized behavior will prove useful when debugging problems with the blinkers and will facilitate the creation of new modules.

The methods have been tested in simulated scenarios and automated tests with seemingly no problems.

Examples:

Tests with the start planner, using shift pull out, geometric planners

start_planner_generalized_turn_signal.mp4

Tests for the LC and avoidance modules:

LC_and_avoidance_generalized_turn_signal.mp4

Full test for start planner ,goal planner & avoidance

cap-.2024-03-15-14-32-20.mp4

Backwards movement with geometric pullout:

cap-.2024-03-15-14-39-23.mp4

Related links

EVALUATOR TESTS -> No degradation: TIER IV INTERNAL LINK

Tests performed

PSIM
EVALUATOR TESTS -> No degradation: TIER IV INTERNAL LINK

Notes for reviewers

Interface changes

Effects on system behavior

Pre-review checklist for the PR author

The PR author must check the checkboxes below when creating the PR.

In-review checklist for the PR reviewers

The PR reviewers must check the checkboxes below before approval.

  • The PR follows the pull request guidelines.
  • The PR has been properly tested.
  • The PR has been reviewed by the code owners.

Post-review checklist for the PR author

The PR author must check the checkboxes below before merging.

  • There are no open discussions or they are tracked via tickets.
  • The PR is ready for merge.

After all checkboxes are checked, anyone who has write access can merge the PR.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Sanchez <danielsanchezaran@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Sanchez <danielsanchezaran@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Sanchez <danielsanchezaran@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Sanchez <danielsanchezaran@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Sanchez <danielsanchezaran@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Sanchez <danielsanchezaran@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Sanchez <danielsanchezaran@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Sanchez <danielsanchezaran@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Sanchez <danielsanchezaran@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Sanchez <danielsanchezaran@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Sanchez <danielsanchezaran@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Sanchez <danielsanchezaran@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Sanchez <danielsanchezaran@gmail.com>
@github-actions github-actions bot added type:documentation Creating or refining documentation. (auto-assigned) component:planning Route planning, decision-making, and navigation. (auto-assigned) labels Mar 15, 2024
@danielsanchezaran danielsanchezaran marked this pull request as ready for review March 15, 2024 05:51
@danielsanchezaran
Copy link
Contributor Author

Separating this PR into several.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
component:planning Route planning, decision-making, and navigation. (auto-assigned) type:documentation Creating or refining documentation. (auto-assigned)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants